Posts
Let’s see, an aggrieved Muslim opens fire on white people in Colorade, killing ten of them, and the problem is-- you guessed it, white supremacy.
People who believe in their narrative, who take it to be dogma, should be cheering this act of rebellion against white privilege. After all, they have been militating for it. They have been supporting every manner of violence against white people and their interests.
And yet, when their rhetoric becomes reality, they are the first ones running for the exits. First they declared Ahmad al Aliwi Alissa to be white. After all, he looked white, and he fit the narrative. So he had to be white.
When they discovered that he was a Muslim, they immediately declared that he was aggrieved by Islamophobia. Thus, white bigots had incited him to violence. That he had committed this violence against white people did not make a lot of sense, but it’s not the point to make any of it make sense. The point is to advance the narrative.
Finally, our thought leaders have declared that Ahmad al Aliwi Alissa was mentally ill, and thus sorely in need of treatment. Of course, we know nothing about whether he sought treatment or whether his parents had him on their insurance. Thanks to Obamacare, he, being 21 years of age, qualified for parental insurance.
But, the only treatment that is guaranteed to work in such cases is involuntary commitment-- locking him up in a psych word. And yet, as we discovered in the case of the Aurora, Colorado shooter, James Holmes, it is extremely difficult in Colorado to get someone committed against his will. You recall that Holmes had been consulting with a psychiatrist who wanted to have him committed. And who could not do it, given state laws. You may thank the civil liberties lobby for that one.
From this we can only conclude that the fault lies with guns. And with the gun lobby.
If that is not true, the American left would have to admit that Ahmad al Aliwi Alissa was merely acting on the eliminationist rhetoric that the radical left has been spewing for the past few years. From hating Trump to hating white people to excusing violence against white people to blaming white people for any violence committed by people of color.
It is a sad and sorry reflection of the current state of the American mind.
6 comments:
Knee-jerk claims of systemic white-supremacy are examples of an emerging new order of systemic-racism.
Why do people with histories of mental illness get to buy guns?
MR2 hath nailed it!
Anon, "Theoretically", they can't... And as we all know, "theory" and "real life" don't get along very well...
Are you required to ackowledge your history of mental illness on an application to purchase a firearm? How many people would? Is that even checked?
It is a sad and sorry reflection of the current state of the American mind.
The psycho left wing American mind.
He was on probation for assault—and he can buy a gun?
Anon, how do you expect this process to work? Have you ever bought a gun?
One fills out a form, which is then submitted into some black-box, which spits out an accept/reject answer.
The first problem: There is no way to ensure the form is truthfully and accurately (not the same thing) completed. Yes, there is an "under penalty of perjury" notice, but if someone is already planning to KILL SOMEBODY, I don't think a perjury charge is in his top 10 list of concerns.
The second problem: No one really knows what goes on inside that black-box. In an ideal world (from this perspective), all the local law enforcement data is uploaded in a timely manner, appropriately cross-referenced (and how exactly does one uniquely identify every person in the country - when the data may be wrong either fraudulently or simply bad data entry? Solve that problem and you will be very, very rich), and no one makes a mistake inside the black-box (e.g. transcribing the form into a computer).
Individually, both of the problems are nearly unsolvable. Together, they're a nightmare.
Post a Comment