posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 04:48 PM
Wow, this is terrible!
God bless all those who have lost loved ones and those who have lost their lives, please bless those injured as well!
There were apparently no use of guns to perpetrate this tragedy. I thought this would lead most people to believe this event could not be used as a
new dynamic in the gun legislation debate, to help push the gun legislation approval.
I was one of those who thought this could not be used in the gun debate, but then...
I was just watching the coverage when something caught my ear...
The news anchor said, 'Here'e what the Vice-President had to say in earlier comments. He was interrupted while giving a speech on gun control
They made it a point to acknowledge the VP's whereabouts and what he was doing there. They could have easily said, 'Here's what the VP commented
earlier about the tragedy'. There was no need to describe his daily agenda that was interrupted to give the comment.
Maybe it is something that is done more than I realize, but I do not remember hearing reporters describe, in modest detail, what the referenced person
was doing, prior to commenting on the tragedy.
I am still unsure whether an attempt will be made to somehow tie this into gun-control legislation. Could this event be used to present new
legislation that will affect weapons, in general, not only specific gun laws?
It may not sprout wings, but I am sure someone, somewhere, will try to draw a connection between such security breakdowns and public gun ownership.