CNN’s Anchor: It Doesn’t Matter if Gun Violence is Down

Fanaticism is fully revealed when the ends are so important that conflicting facts are willfully disregarded in favor of achieving one’s objective. This moral quagmire often pops up in liberal arguments- a group for whom emotion plays a large role.

However, it is fairly rare to have them outright state, “Facts be damned- I want it my way!”

But, apparently, as emotions run wild in the wake of the tragedy in Connecticut, the left is willing to adopt an “ends justify the means” attitude that conflicts directly with reality.

On Monday, CNN’s Don Lemon had a hissy-meltdown and went off with one of the most ignorant rants I have heard in quite some time. He stated,

“For the past three days, I have been on the verge of tears every second and most of the people here have been crying 24 hours straight. Yeah – yes, we need to address mental health, but mental health in this particular issue, let’s not get it twisted, is a secondary issue. If someone who has a mental issue did not have access to guns that should only be available in war zones, we would not be dealing with this.

Who needs an armor-piercing bullet to go hunting? Who needs an assault rifle to go hunting? You can’t even use the prey that you kill with an assault rifle if you indeed do it. No one needs an assault rifle to go out and shoot a deer. No one needs an assault rifle that’s capable of shooting 10, 20, 30 rounds off at the same time to shoot a duck, or to shoot quail. It does not make sense. Our first – the first thing that we need to do – and according to everyone that is here, even gun enthusiasts, is talk about what we’re doing with assault rifles, why should guns that should only be available in war zones, why are they available to people who are mentally healthy and people who are not mentally healthy. That’s the issue that we need to deal with.”

I love it when liberals go to the “explain why you need a ___” argument. It’s like if I took my neighbor’s lawnmower and told him that if he wants it back, he should explain why I should be inclined to allow him to have it. If he has a shred of self-respect, he’d tell me to go to hell and to give him back his lawnmower pronto.

Likewise, if anyone has a problem with why I, or anybody else, would like a rifle, they may direct their attention to the Second Amendment which clearly states, “…shall not be infringed.” I can’t make it any clearer than that. Whether I want it to shoot quail or not is irrelevant.

He continued, (emphasis added)

“So to say that gun violence is down does not make sense, and to me is insulting to everyone who lost a loved one here and is dealing with that. It doesn’t matter if gun violence is down, 26 children – 20 children are dead here, and six adults are dead, and the mother of a person who’s not mentally up – who’s mentally challenged in some way is – she’s dead. So to say that gun violence is down and we need to talk about mental health – yes, mental health is a secondary issue. We need to get guns and bullets and automatic weapons off the streets. They should only be available to police officers and to hunt al Qaeda and the Taliban and not hunt elementary school children.”

It’s a special kind of self-delusion that prompts a man to say, in the middle of his rant, “So what if supporting evidence shows I’m wrong?! I’m emotional and I demand action!”

All I’ve been hearing from the left is how America needs to have “a discussion” about gun control.  For me, all I’ve heard are reasons why we shouldn’t have a discussion on gun control. Clearly, these lefty loonies are unbalanced and cannot discuss long-term solutions rationally.

Like a toddler, it’s best to not give in and let the tantrum go on for awhile until they’re all tuckered out.

This entry was posted in Guns, News, Second Amendment, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to CNN’s Anchor: It Doesn’t Matter if Gun Violence is Down

  1. Pingback: CNN’s Anchor: It Doesn’t Matter if Gun Violence is Down :: Minute Men News

  2. David says:

    Very well said. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting rights, and everything to do with the rights of American citizens to protect themselves against whoever would seek to infringe upon their God-given rights of life and liberty. It was the looney liberals that wanted to make schools “gun free zones.” By doing so, they have largely made schools soft targets for those who wish to harm students and teachers. The only common sense solution to the problem is to allow responsible teachers, administrators, security personnel, and/or parents to have access to firearms to immediately confront and neutralize such threats when they occur on school campuses. Hostile students and others would not be nearly as likely to pick innocent school children for their victims if they knew beyond any shadow of a doubt that there would be immediate retaliation.

  3. Paul Goff says:

    This rant is just mind blowing. This man has no idea what an assault rifle is or what they are used for. His concept of hunting is just as ignorant. Why do people like this have access the the media. He is far more dangerous than the people that legally own firearms.

  4. ontarget says:

    What i hear is don’t kill kids with any weapon that looks like some thing the army uses.
    How about don’t kill school childern!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>