As the NRA goes into "damage-control" mode after the Aurora, Colorado shootings, is it issuing orders to stifle debate on the topic of assault-weapon restrictions by accusing its opponents of "politicizing a tragedy"?
Almost immediately after the two articles on the Aurora movie theater tragedy appeared in The TIMES (July 20-21), local NRA surrogates went immediately into damage-control mode and - taking a cue from NRA websites - started accusing anyone who even mentioned the notion of restricting sales and ownership of combat-style assault weapons, and other high-tech WMDS, of "politicizing" this awful tragedy. This is interesting, considering that, as Governor of Massachusetts in 2005, Mitt Romney signed into law a ban on such weapons in that state ... And that President Obama has made NO effort to institue new laws about assault weapons (saying instead that he only supports enforcing "existing laws") ... Another fib that the NRA folks put out after the Tucson shootings was that the "dictator" Obama was "secretly" restricting access to ammunition ... So how did James Holmes manage to acquire 6000 rounds of ammo via the Internet? Some "restrictions"
No comments posted for this topic.