I picked up a copy of a local free paper because it had an interesting headline, Did Sarah Palin, tea party cause shooting. (The Tribune Asheville, January 20, January 26, 2011. Vol 15. No 3. Don Millicoat) this paper has a reputation for being conservative and I am not, so I wanted to see what they had to say about the whole deal. Well have a look at the article and my reply.
That is if you can figure out how to get it online. The Tribune does have an online presence, but I could not figure out how to get a copy of the article to attach to this post. At least have a look at my reply; (thank you third grade teacher for making me restate the question before answering it 😉 ), my points should be fairly obvious. So let me know what you think. And if anyone can help me to get into the Tribune’s archives, please do so.
So here it is:
Why is it whenever someone writes for the first time, they need to introduce themselves? Consider me identified. Also, I have only read the Tribune this one time, but find it an interesting read. I am liberal by nature. Having said that, I feel that government needs step in sometimes in order to help those not as powerful to get a better stake in life.
I picked up the Tribune today because I saw the headline about the shooting in Arizona and I wanted to get a conservative point of view.
One of the points you tried to make had to do with the size of the magazine. The common speaking point I hear is that size does not matter. This lunatic would have shot at Congressman Gifford no matter the size of the magazine. This may or may not be true. Maybe he would have been discouraged if he could not have had as much firepower. After all, he was taken down while changing the emptied magazine. Could the use of a 10 round magazine prevented more than 20 rounds from being fired off? One wonders how many people would be alive and well now if he had not had those extra rounds to fire. You ask the question, “Would restricting use to 10-round magazines have PREVENTED the events…?” I propose the answer is no maybe not, though many less rounds would have been fired off.
The second part of your article was interesting but did not seem to support your argument. What does hunting with dogs have to do with a shooting in Arizona?