Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting
Posted by carpediem on 12/12/03
On 11/23/03, Joel Clyde wrote: > Okay! We'll dissect this a piece at a time so I can show > everyone how this anti-2nd Ammendment propaganda works. Pay > attention class! > > The first thing to notice is that the story comes from > Chicago and CNN, both notorious for anti-gun bias, so you > can be reasonably sure that it's not the whole story and is > written with an anti-gun spin no matter what. > > The story says Mr. Tapia was fired from the warehouse six > months prior to the incident....SIX MONTHS! It sure took him > a long time to make up his mind and get a firearm! The > logical conclusion: The shooting had nothing to do with his > being fired. It just makes the story sound better and they > don't have to look any further for a motive. > > He was killed in the "last" of three gun battles with > police...DUH! I thought maybe he might have gotten killed in > the first one and fought the other two posthumously! Again, > it makes it sound better and diverts attention from the real > question: Why were there 3 battles with the heavily armed, > assault weapon bearing, SWAT trained and numerically > superior Chicago Police Dept? They should have pegged him in > the first one! If our military did that bad we'd be in real > trouble! I don't think much of their Hostage Barricade and > Terrorist Team, being held off twice by an individual with > a .380 'pop gun'. For those of you who don't know, the > Walther .380 (erroneously described as a 'PP' to make it > sound like it's larger battle-proven brethren, the PPKs)is a > small 'pocket' pistol with a low-powered cartridge. It's > only good point is that it is very concealable. None would > purposly go into combat with this caliber if they had a > choice of almost anything else! Their original purpose was > as a last-ditch back-up weapon, and was a favorite of SS and > KGB assasins due to it's low noise, light weight and > adaptability for silencers. > > The article does not speculate about the possible outcome > had even one of the employees been armed. Reason: There > would not have been 7 victims to report about...only one > dead disgruntled ex-employee, and would've called into > question Chicago's total ban on handguns to all but police, > who were stood off by a lone man with a wimpy little pistol. > > The article says that deceased Mr. Tapia has been arrested > 12 times. Hello!....an arrest is not a conviction and unless > you are under a current indictment would not keep you from > buying a gun. That's the law...innocent until proven guily, > unless Mr.Goldstein is advocating changing that as well. > Arrested 12 TIMES!...and no convictions? Doesn't say much > for Chicago's Justice System, does it? > > And where does it say that Mr. Tapia even purchased the > pistol in the first place? Answer: Because he probably stole > it, maybe even from a police officer's home or car. No law > would ever prevent someone from stealing a gun. That's what > criminals do...break laws, right? > > The 'easy access" to a gun that Police Superintendent Cline > spoke of is not defined. How was this .380 acquired? Why are > we not told? Answer: Because it would demonstrate the total > failure of Chicago's super-strict gun control policies, and > the ineptitude with which the entire incident was handled by > the Chicago Police. > > Mr. Golsteins comments are equally distorted. > Mr. Tapia was not "exercising his Constitutional Right > to have a gun" since it is illegal to commit murder, with or > without a firearm. Also, it is not stated as to whether Mr. > Tapias even had the gun legally in the first place. There is > room for much doubt. > > The right of the victims to live were "sacrificed" by > Chicago's paranoid anti-gun Administration that made sure > that Mr. Tapia would be attacking unarmed, defensless people. > > Repeal of the 2nd Ammendment would not have stopped Mr. > Tapia from his rampage, since it was already illegal under > our current laws. How about we just repeal the 1st > Ammendment instead, and then you won't have to read about > it? Of course, you might not get to be Jewish anymore should > you ever return here, but oh well...it's a flawed document, > right? > > The Constitution, in it's entirety is ABSOLUTE! It has to be > or it means nothing! (anything after the 10th Ammendment is > an addendum and not part of the original Constitution). The > 2nd Ammendment was put in to ensure the continuity of the > other nine, as well as the rest of the Constitution, make > invasion of America a foolhardy consideration, and to keep > our government and ourselves honest. > > Beware of those who freely enjoy the portions of freedom > they use while advocating the removal of yours! > > "Those who would trade any of their freedoms for any measure > of security deserve neither" > John Hancock---signitory: > Constitution of the > United States Of America Good Show!!! Sombody stick a fork in our liberal freedom hating friend, I think he's done :c)
Posts on this thread, including this one
- Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 8/28/03, by Shmuel Goldstein.
- Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 11/23/03, by Joel Clyde.
- Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 11/23/03, by Joel Clyde.
- Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 12/12/03, by carpediem.
- Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 2/14/04, by Punchhowzer.
- Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 3/22/04, by Sheila Cohen.
- Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 4/27/05, by Joel Clyde.
- Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 10/15/05, by Bill.
- Re: Seven die in Chicago warehouse shooting, 10/17/05, by Dale.
|