I read the whole thing last night and took a sip of vodka every time I spotted a lie. This morning, I woke up in my neighbor's yard naked and covered in what appeared to be a mixture of brake fluid and BBQ sauce.
The police said they would send me a video after they put it on youtube.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Quote of the Day
From Kaveman on the latest Brady "Assault Weapon" regurgitation:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
From the Brady Bunch press release:
Stephen Liczbinski, a 12-year veteran of the Philadelphia Police Department, executed in May by bank robbery suspects just days short of his 40th birthday. He left a wife, Michelle, and three children, Matt, Stephen and Amber.
Am I remembering incorrectly, or did officer Liczbinski's killer use an SKS, which was not banned by the expired "assault weapons" ban?
From the same press release:
Janet Jorgensen, 68, mother of three and grandmother of eight, who had just celebrated her 50th wedding anniversary when she was gunned down in the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Nebraska during the Christmas shopping season in December 2007. At St. James Catholic Church, the crowd for her funeral was standing room only. Robert Hawkins, 19, killed eight before committing suicide.
Again, I may be recalling this incorrectly, but wasn't the weapon used at the Westroads Mall a WASR-90--another firearm not banned in '94?
Correct on both counts.
Anti's like the Brady Bunch follow the Humpty Dumpty school of defining words"
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less."
That would mean, then, that of the four examples listed in their press release, fully half of them would not have been affected by the sunsetting of the ban.
I wonder how many more of their "At Least 163 Dead, 185 Wounded, 15 Police Officers Dead, 23 Wounded," since the expiration of the ban are also utterly unrelated to the ban's expiration.
I would bet that if you went through the anecdotes they provide in their 'report', the majority would not have fallen under the federal AWB.
Since they posted what they obviously thought were four of the most damaging examples, and half of those were bogus, I would suspect that *none* of the remainder have anything to do with the bill they want passed.
Which is about average.
Post a Comment