Quote:
Originally Posted by sexobon
It's interesting that while the Congresswoman advocated (according to reports) concealed carry in a State that permits it, neither the Congresswoman nor anyone in her entourage appears to have availed themselves of this means of protecting themselves; or, their constituency! While the element of surprise would have still kept the Congresswoman from being saved from harm, the others who were injured and killed might have been spared if someone, anyone, had been in a viable position to respond to a lethal threat without having to wait for the perpetrator to stop and reload.
Everyone knows that such public gatherings enhance the targetability of those attending; so, it appears that the Congresswoman simply didn't consider personnel security to be her duty even though she had the right to own it. If she and her entourage had been known to exercise that right, this incident might not have occurred. I suppose it's like when people who have the right to vote just don't want to bother with getting out and voting; or, otherwise rationalize leaving the outcome to others. They just don't consider it to be their civic duty.
|
So, public figures using violent allegory to rouse their supporters to heights of political passion is just the exercising of rights to free expression, but the victim in an assassination attempt is irresponsible for not carrying a firearm?
Forgive me for my bluntness but that really sounds off kilter to me. I also really don;t see how you can draw any kind of equivalence between responsibly taking part in the democratic process through voting, and carrying a weapon.