One Gray Lady helping another.
The New York Times is running an editorial on its front page on Saturday, the first time the paper has done so since 1920, calling for greater regulation on guns in the aftermath of a spate of mass shootings.
The editorial, headlined “The Gun Epidemic,” describes it as “a moral outrage and a national disgrace that people can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency.” It suggests drastically reducing the number of firearms, and “eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition.”
“It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment,” it reads. “No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.”
In a statement, the publisher of The Times, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., said the paper was placing an editorial on Page 1 for the first time in many decades “to deliver a strong and visible statement of frustration and anguish about our country’s inability to come to terms with the scourge of guns.”
“Even in this digital age, the front page remains an incredibly strong and powerful way to surface issues that demand attention,” Mr. Sulzberger said. “And, what issue is more important than our nation’s failure to protect its citizens?”
The editorial reflects the intensifying debate over gun laws that is taking place in the days following two recent mass shootings — one in Colorado Springs on Nov. 27, and another in San Bernardino, Calif., on Wednesday in which 14 people were shot and killed.
There is so much that is wrong here that it’s almost impossible to cover in a blog post.
The body count in San Bernardino is the result of yet another post-9/11 security failure, not the Second Amendment.
Again, if there were any real journalists left in America, they would be digging into a host of things that have nothing to do with restricting the constitutional rights of law abiding Americans.
Perhaps they could look into how a mail order Pakistani bride was able to enter the U.S. via Saudi Arabia by providing a fake address.
Or they might want to dig deeper into figuring out how Syed Farook was able to digitally cavort with terrorists and go virtually unnoticed.
The problem here is radicalized Islamists, not accessibility to firearms in America. The murderers had a house full of pipe bombs. It was going to be ugly, whether or not they ever came near any firearms.
What the Times is doing amounts to nothing more than shilling for the Democrats as we head to a most important election. The editorial deflects attention from the real problem, and promotes the myth that the American public is clamoring for gun control.
There is no “intensifying debate” over stricter gun laws anywhere outside of the coastal media bubbles.
In reality, Americans are buying so many guns that gun company stock prices are up 70% this year.
As for the “debate” mentioned in the article, more Americans oppose stricter gun laws than favor them, and that number is growing.
The reason the Democrats and this president keep failing to pass legislation that undermines the Second Amendment is that American citizens are overwhelmingly opposed to them and their gun grabbing ways.
The New York Times isn’t running its first Page One editorial in almost a century because it is worried about most Americans. It’s doing this because it’s concerned about Hillary Clinton and the great Democrat denial about radical Islam. The paper is desperate to keep a false narrative going, much to the detriment of the greater safety of the American people.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member