. . .. . from an antigun perspective.
I remember the Clinton years. I call out to people who remember those days, and maybe back to the late 80s. . . . .
There were a bunch of publicized shootings in 1999-2001. Someone would go nuts, and immediately Clinton and other politicians would be talking about trigger locks and wagging their fingers at gunowners and the NRA.
It could be that my own perception of it has changed (that I don't even register antigun stories any more due to their commonality). But I don't see the intensity of response.
Has anyone noticed as I am that the antigun response is more subdued than it used to be? If so, what do you think are the factors? Are we desensitized to massacres? Are the big dems scared of pushing it down their media chain and rattling/rallying gunowners? Is deference to the grieving of the victims causing those who would do the usual "blood dance" to wait out of respect?
I'm sure Sarah Brady is raising holy hell. But few politicians or CNN types seem to be doing so. They're talking about the murderer, I honestly think MSNBC and CNN are implying he's more to blame than the NRA!
They've got people on TV talking about concealed carry so people can defend themselves - they discredit it; but there's often someone on putting it out there, giving the idea a bit of air time.
Any thoughts on this? Is this the calm before the storm? I don't see this getting milked fast enough to harness the disgust over the shooting - and I don't see a particularly high amount of that disgust being directed toward gun ownership compared to 8 years ago.
I remember the Clinton years. I call out to people who remember those days, and maybe back to the late 80s. . . . .
There were a bunch of publicized shootings in 1999-2001. Someone would go nuts, and immediately Clinton and other politicians would be talking about trigger locks and wagging their fingers at gunowners and the NRA.
It could be that my own perception of it has changed (that I don't even register antigun stories any more due to their commonality). But I don't see the intensity of response.
Has anyone noticed as I am that the antigun response is more subdued than it used to be? If so, what do you think are the factors? Are we desensitized to massacres? Are the big dems scared of pushing it down their media chain and rattling/rallying gunowners? Is deference to the grieving of the victims causing those who would do the usual "blood dance" to wait out of respect?
I'm sure Sarah Brady is raising holy hell. But few politicians or CNN types seem to be doing so. They're talking about the murderer, I honestly think MSNBC and CNN are implying he's more to blame than the NRA!
They've got people on TV talking about concealed carry so people can defend themselves - they discredit it; but there's often someone on putting it out there, giving the idea a bit of air time.
Any thoughts on this? Is this the calm before the storm? I don't see this getting milked fast enough to harness the disgust over the shooting - and I don't see a particularly high amount of that disgust being directed toward gun ownership compared to 8 years ago.