We’re not supposed to paint Muslims with a broad brush based on the actions of the violent minority. They’ll riot in the streets and hold up signs that read, “Behead those who insult Islam!” if some cartoonist “blasphemes” by depicting Muhammad in one of his illustrations. But we’re not supposed to say anything. We’re supposed to be tolerant of all religions and not pay attention to the few exceptions.
We’re not supposed to paint blacks with the same kind of broad brush just because there happens to be a lot more violence carried out by blacks than by whites. Black-on-black as well as black-on-white violence is more prevalent than white-on-white and white-on-black violence. We’ve seen black mobs descend on white, defenseless people and beat them up for no other reason than they were bored. In recent years, we’ve seen an increase in black-on-white knockout attacks. But we can’t say anything critical, because that would be racist. Being cautious around certain people based on what they look like is a big social no-no, unless that person you’re being cautious around is a white guy. In that case, be extra cautious, because white people are privileged and believe inherently that they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because “the system” favors white people.
We’ve seen an increase in police-on-civilian violence. Police are trained to shoot to kill when they feel their lives are threatened, and it takes very little to make a cop “feel threatened.” Not too long ago, a cop knocked on the door of someone’s house, and a 17-year-old boy answered with a video game remote in his hand. The cop “felt threatened” and shot and killed the kid. There are hundreds of these types of cases, where police SWAT teams break in someone’s house in the wee hours of the morning, and if anyone in the house even thinks about defending himself, the police kill him. And then they might find they’re at the wrong house. We read stories all the time of cops brutalizing defenseless civilians, tazering them, killing them, or otherwise just beating them up just because. But we can’t get on to the police just because there are a “few bad apples.” We can’t paint them with a broad brush.
But there’s at least one sect of people whom we’re supposed to judge based on the actions of the tiny minority. We’re supposed to paint them with that broad brush that isn’t allowed with Muslims, black mobs or power-hungry cops. Gun-owners. We’re supposed to believe that mass shootings are on the rise, and that it’s all the fault of the NRA and “lax” gun laws.
Look at the married couple murderers who killed a couple cops in a CiCi’s Pizza in Vegas. The media used that not only to associate these murderers with everything conservative and libertarian, but they also used it as a springboard to talk about how cop-killings are “on the rise,” and how police departments are “getting nervous” around civilians because of this “trend.” And what will they do when they “get nervous?” They’ll act more rashly and violently. They’ll lament the alleged rise in cop-killings, but they won’t say a word about the rise in cop-on-civilian deaths. In fact, I don’t think anyone even keeps an official tally on that. They’re probably so numerous that they don’t want anyone to know.
Or look at the recent shooting at an Oregon high school. One student died, and the shooter apparently killed himself. Obama declared that “this is becoming the norm.” What’s becoming the norm? That people are figuring out more and more that if you try to ban guns in a particular locale where a bunch of people happen to congregate on a regular basis (you know, like a school or the entire city of Chicago), that that’s where the armed criminal wants to be? No, of course not that. Obama’s just talking about school shootings. And we all know they have nothing to do with “gun-free zones.” Let’s not bring politics into this. They have to do with crazy white kids who have access to “military-style” “assault rifles” and “high-capacity” magazines. This has nothing to do with politics. It’s about our children!
CNN reported on Obama’s reaction to the shooting:
Most members of Congress are “terrified” of the National Rifle Association, [Obama] said Tuesday, adding that nothing will change until public opinion demands it.
“The country has to do some soul searching about this. This is becoming the norm, and we take it for granted, in ways that as a parent are terrifying to me,” Obama said.
There was no immediate response from the NRA.
So, out of the 100 million or more Americans who own guns, the “few bad apples” who misuse them justifies painting all gun-owners with the same broad brush that applies to murderers? What in the world does the NRA have to do with this particular incident? I don’t even really care for the NRA, but they have nothing to do with this shooting. You might as well start asking for a response from Budweiser or Jack Daniels about what they’re going to do about the rise in drunk-driving fatalities. Oh, but that has nothing to do with the alcohol; that has to do with personal responsibility.