Does the Mayor honestly believe that a civilian ban on guns would have stopped this crazy Jihadist. Does the Mayor honestly think that a ban on possession would stop AQ from instructing and recruiting extremists to their cause in this country? It hasn’t stopped the drug lords from tearing up his city.
Before you watch the video, read this from Founding Bloggers, and make sure you read the entire post. It’s not long … but it is on the mark.
With no pogrom backlash after 9/11, no pogrom backlash after Bali, no pogrom backlash after Madrid, no pogrom backlash after London, no pogrom backlash after Mumbai, no backlash after countless other Jihad attacks, why would there be any reason to believe the reaction would be any different in this case? As we have written before, the West has already passed this particular civility test.
The Mayor is using a straw-man argument that conveniently provides him with an opportunity to politicize the terrorist attack as part and parcel with America’s love of guns.
It’s the same point I made in an e-mail to a listener today. In it he made the point that General Casey had reason to be concerned that there might be some racist backlash in the Army. As I replied to him, although FB was much more eloquent, there is just no reason to believe there will suddenly be a backlash when there has been none to date.
There certainly is no reason to blame guns.