Adam Lanza is the shooter in the most recent domestic gun-slaughter, this time at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut.
His first victim was his mother, who owned the weapons he used to kill her and then twenty children, most aged 5 to 10 years old.
NRA fetishists (sorry, arms manufacturer sales-support groups) think the tragedy could have been stopped if only Adam Lanza’s first victims had been armed. Except of course, his first victim was armed.
Michael Moore has the perfect reply.
If only the first victim, Adam Lanza’s mother, had been a gun owner, she could have stopped this before it started.
— Michael Moore (@MMFlint) December 16, 2012
She was a gun owner. And her gun got her killed. And twenty kids along with her.
Oh, and my suggestion — don’t try logic on the NRA. Their job really is sales support, as Lee Fang suggests at The Nation:
Is the NRA working for casual gun-owners, many of whom, according to polling, support tougher restrictions on gun ownership— or is the NRA serving the gunmaker lobby— which is purely interested in policies that will promote greater gun sales and more profits? Any gun control policy debate should begin with this question.
As John likes to say, the NRA isn’t about casual gun-owners – they’re simply the NRA’s kinder and gentler “beard.” Exactly right. If gun sales is the NRA’s true job, they’re as much a perp in the Lanza shooting as Lanza (say I).
To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius