if it were up to me, I'd take away the guns

[primroseburrows]

I haven't really heard what the Arizona shooter's politics are, but there seems to be a lot of polarization (surprise!) between the right and the left about the whole thing, and I think everyone's completely missing the point. No matter what crazy leftist or rightist theory he may have ascribed to, he still killed or injured a bunch of people. And remember, this guy was rejected from refused entry into the Army (thanks, writergirl423, for the clarification), dropped out of junior college because they wanted him to have a psych evaluation, was the "loner kid" in school, and was obsessed with violence. Etcetera.

So it seems to me that the most important thing isn't about right or left. What we take away from all this should be this: with all of the screaming red flags that the Arizona shooter had, how the heck did he own a legal gun?

(That being said, I'm really, really glad he's not connected to the Tea Party, because that would be horrible. Or any lefty organization, for that matter. Because the minute something becomes political these days the situation tends to get way worse.)

Comments

[gloriana.livejournal.com]

My question exactly. A system that allows someone with his history to have a gun at all is undeniably kerfunkt, whether or not one believes that the militia in general have a right to arms.

[primroseburrows.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I'm not even talking about the Second Amendment here, or any political debate. It's just common sense to not let disturbed people have firearms, wtf?