Taking up a cause for their son is praiseworthy. Doing so ineptly is not.
The fact is the man made an argument that was so poor it discredits the cause of restricting handgun rights.
The fact that he does so in the name of his murdered son does not excuse him from counter-arguments, nor does it make his facts creditble, nor does it make him more convincing.
Perhaps he should blame the human behind the trigger, that person's background, arrest records and other mechanisms of society which empowered the criminal to take his son's life than an inanimate object.
that's my unfeeling b@stard's .02 on this.
The fact is the man made an argument that was so poor it discredits the cause of restricting handgun rights.
The fact that he does so in the name of his murdered son does not excuse him from counter-arguments, nor does it make his facts creditble, nor does it make him more convincing.
Perhaps he should blame the human behind the trigger, that person's background, arrest records and other mechanisms of society which empowered the criminal to take his son's life than an inanimate object.
that's my unfeeling b@stard's .02 on this.