Thursday, December 06, 2007

As many of you have heard, a 19 year old with severe mental issues went on a sniping binge in the largest shopping mall here in Omaha yesterday. He killed 9 people and wounded 5 others using a modified SKS rifle.

Here is what I posted on Free Republic in response to a thread on the matter:

It was obvious this kid (and even if he was 19, he was still a kid in my eyes as he had never grown up emotionally) had planned this for a while. He timed this with the President’s visit, knowing most law enforcement would be away from the store. He had previously scouted the store, as he knew right where to go to have the best vantage point for ‘sniping’ of all the malls in Omaha (Van Maur has a big open area, with a nice railing around the third floor where one can brace a gun...no other store has as good of view in any of the malls in town)

All the warning signs were there of the kid about to go off, like the original poster stated. This is a tragedy that could have been stopped by those who knew the kid.

And, of course, CNN immediately trots out things like ‘mall security’, and ‘are you safe in a mall’ instead of looking at the real cause of the problem: clueless idiots not paying attention to signs right in front of them.

To the poster that said an SKS is not an assault rifle: sorry, yes it is. It may be only single shot, but it is a variant of a fully automatic gun. Though it might be used by some for hunting, it is not what this area calls a hunting rifle by any means. This SKS, according to witnesses, was also firing 3 round bursts. This means it was modified back to its assault rifle roots.

I am very much a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but the weapon the kid was carrying is exactly the weapon banned by the assault weapon law. That brings up the question on how someone mentally instable like he was could get a hold of one of these weapons. Rumor was he stole it from his step father. But this also means none of those assault weapon provisions in law would have prevented this, thus proving how useless they are. A psychopath can get a hold of one of these weapons, yet law abiding citizens cannot defend themselves and thus end up becoming victims. One person with a pistol to defend themselves could have prevented 8 other deaths, but you won’t hear that on the liberal media.

Now, a little clarification: 'Robbie' the shooter had more than enough signs pointing at a kid that was a ticking time bomb. He lost his girlfriend, his job, etc. all within the last two weeks. He was to be in court next week for a misdemeanor charge against him. He had a fascination with guns, killing, and threatening people. His step father owned the SKS, and 'Robbie' not only knew about the gun, but how to break in to take it. He showed the gun off to the stupid woman he was living with the night before, for God's sake!

The feigning of surprise by the lady and her son, who was 'Robbie's friend is a bunch of baloney. Unfortunately, the kid did this just after the President had left Omaha, thus all the national media was still in town. CNN is having an absolute field day on this, filled with half-truths in order to promote their agenda. Thank god for our local folks as they have a clue on how to report for the most part.

Yesterday was a tragedy. Let's not make it even worse by misinterpreting what really happened to fit a political agenda.

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Is it too much to ask for to have a real conservative actually in the race for president, that could poll more than 2%?

This is the most frustrating election ever as there are no candidates until you get to Duncan Hunter that would get my vote at any other time.

Here's all I am asking for:

1) A Candidate that will protect innocent lives. By this, I mean both protect society from murderers and protect children from abortionists, as well as sex offenders.

2) A Candidate that understands we cannot have people with no medical history, and no way to determine whether they violate #1 above, running over our borders without restriction.

3) A Candidate that realizes protecting our citizens does not need to go to the extremes of the supercomputer in I, Robot, who basically wanted to imprison everyone in order to better 'protect' them from themselves. This includes forcing things like government-run 'programs' to 'help' people, thus making them slaves to the system.

4) A Candidate that believes interfering with life in the home, and in private, is only applicable in a situation where lives are being put into direct danger, not indirect danger via second hand smoke and other trivial actions

5) A Candidate that realizes we are the enforcers of political and personal liberty in the world, and thus we must act against those who oppress their people. Totalitarianism cannot be defined by the words 'left' and 'right', there is either freedom or oppression no matter the basis of the supposed political beliefs.

Five key traits I want in the president. Rudy violates #1, Huckabee violates #2, many candidates violate #3 and #4, Ron Paul violates #5. The only candidate that fits all of these is poor Duncan Hunter, who is being ignored by everyone because he doesn't have a strong personality and can't get the fundraising to offset that disadvantage.

On the Democratic side, I've yet to find a candidate that even adheres to 1 of those traits I've listed.

Thus, when it comes to the general election, I'll vote for the person who matches the most of those five traits I've listed - therefore holding my nose to do it. But, I would much rather have someone that agrees with a few of my positions than none at all. Some would argue I should not vote then, but I cannot let a person who believes in none of the five have a free ride.