Quote:
Originally Posted by meek
Would it have been better if he had been shot and killed? Hypocracy is great, sacrifice to prove the relevency of 2nd ammendent rights is better.
|
No, if the senator was shot and killed...
a.) anti-gun advocates could use it to their advantage. They could ask for even stronger gun control, because a senator was killed by the intruders. It would be easy to spin, since another gun was used in a crime. Since he used a gun to SAVE his life, it becomes nearly impossible to spin against the 2nd amendment. The situation played out as good as it could've for everyone involved.
b.) a life would've been taken. Just because this man is misguided in his 2nd amendment beliefs, it doesn't mean he deserves to die.
Linear Mode
