by Jack
I heard Obama’s speech about this shooting and think rather than focus on the actions of one nut job, he ought to be looking in the mirror at his own race-baiting rhetoric. He’s been amping up the hate on both sides of the fence when he ought to be mending fences.
This misguided fool, 21 year old Dylann Roof, attacked innocent black people in a church! Everyone I know agrees with me that this was an insane and evil thing to do. It was monstrous! But, how many times have we seen it the other way around, and it doesn’t get near the notoriety? Why? But, when one unhinged white person starts shooting black people, suddenly its like a Clarion call for more gun laws leading to eventual confiscation. The knee-jerk democrats always sing the same tune, lets ban guns! That’s shallow thinking at best and dangerous thinking at worst.
For the umpteenth time, gun laws only apply to people who respect the law!!! A tougher gun law would not have prevented the S.C. shooting and with over 200,000,000 guns in America we are not going to take guns away from everyone, it’s just not going to happen. Even the false notion that we’ll all be better off if we surrender our guns won’t remove guns from legal owners. If we did that, we’ll (law abiding) just be easier prey.
Study after study has shown that confiscation of guns and tough gun laws don’t make people safer and it won’t cut crime. It only works to remove a layer of protection from the law abiding types.
I blame Obama for a lot of America’s race problems. So, I would be surprised if this shooter’s motive was not in some way connected to Obama’s mishandling of a number of alleged race based crimes that turned into riots.
Obama - worst president ever.
I’ll second those comments.
What are you talking about. I did not hear race involved in that speech? It’s about background Checks and has been.
Federal law prohibits people with pending felony charges from obtaining firearms. In February, Roof was arrested and later charged with felony possession of Suboxone, a narcotic prescription drug. He was released, and the case is pending.
South Carolina is one of 40 states that do not require background checks for private gun transactions, like the one that allegedly took place between Roof and his father. Gun control activists call this the “private sale” loophole.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/06/18/the-legal-loophole-that-allowed-dylann-roof-to-get-a-gun/
But anytime someone tries to get sensible gun legislation in Ya’all cry it’s a gun grab!
Well the people who are going to one day get our gun rights taken are those who do not allow sensible gun laws, and stop the madness.
Background checks are not gun grabbing except from Criminals. It could be written so as to make sure it never got out of control.
I like my gun rights and you guys are ruining it.
I’M with Gabby on this as a gun owner.
#BackGroundChecks
Dewey FYI I was not talking about race in Obamas last speech.
Oh here it comes…breaking news!!! Shooter Roof obtained his gun illegally, imagine that?
He was awaiting trial on a felony drug charge so he couldn’t legally buy a firearm. Sooooo, how did he get it? His father bought it for him as a birthday gift and his father could be facing up to 10 years in jail for this because he broke the law when he did it. How would a background check have helped here?
And yet we have President Obama calling for more background checks because of this one crazy shooter and his idiot father, as if it would have prevented the shooting. There it is folks, he (Roof) broke the freaking law to get a gun – having more laws won’t help, it will only burden the legal gun owners…duh-uh.
It was predictable, yet Obumble made it to the podium for his latest pulpit-pounding call for gun control in record time.
Riddle me this, Mr Prez – If gun control actually worked, why have the shootings in Chicago gone up so drastically in a city with the strict gun control in place?
The gun control fanatics still haven’t answered the question of how they’re going to get CRIMINALS to register their weapons . . . . .
I can hear the criminals now, “We don’t need no stinkin ID checks to buy guns.”
“Ninety-two percent of voters, including 92 percent of gun owners and 86 percent of Republicans, support background checks prior to all gun sales”
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/211321-poll-most-gun-owners-support-universal-background-checks
Doesn’t seem so controversial to me.
Dewey wrote “South Carolina is one of 40 states that do not require background checks for private gun transactions, like the one that allegedly took place between Roof and his father. Gun control activists call this the “private sale” loophole.”
I am not sure what point Dewey is making, first off you have to be a resident in SC to be eligible to purchase any gun in the state, and the key word is “resident”.
Roof and his father are NC residents, and in NC you do have to complete a NCIC background check to purchase a hand gun, also there are stringent transfer laws that Roofs father broke, as the straw buyer for his sons gun.
But then criminals or want to be criminals will always obtain a gun illegally, so stringent gun laws will never stop a criminal.
Dewey please begin to comprehend this fact, they only impede the lawful possession of a law abiding gun owner, criminals could care less, in fact criminals are probably hoping at some point to be the only ones with guns. Then it’s going to be free range terror that could turn America into a gun free shooting range for the criminals,
I don’t recall ever reading about a criminal going into and shooting up police headquarters, They seem to go where the guns are not allowed, go figure!
Once more the Charleston tragedy was committed by a form of terrorist actions.
No amount of excessive,extrapolated legal “jumping though hoops” to own a gun law is ever going to prevent those types from completing their deprived actions.
However, as a side note, a legal gun owner on site with a carry permit could have prevented some of the deaths that Roof caused.
What a misleading headline. Nowhere in Obama’s speech did he say anything about “grabbing guns.”
If Obama’s position is so reprehensible, then you should be able to actually criticize his position instead of making up a position he doesn’t hold and arguing against that.
“This misguided fool, 21 year old Dylann Roof, attacked innocent black people in a church! Everyone I know agrees with me that this was an insane and evil thing to do. It was monstrous! But, how many times have we seen it the other way around, and it doesn’t get near the notoriety? Why?”
Uh…because that almost never happens?
Seriously, mass shooters are almost always white.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data
“But, when one unhinged white person starts shooting black people, suddenly its like a Clarion call for more gun laws leading to eventual confiscation. The knee-jerk democrats always sing the same tune, lets ban guns!”
Please cite the exact Democrats who have proposed banning guns.
I’m not sure if I support background checks on gun sales between a father and son. It seems hard to enforce, and I have no idea if it would have prevented this particular event. I do know that we need to expand background checks to cover gun shows, and I’ve provided evidence before that this could have prevented the Columbine shooting.
J Soden:
”
Riddle me this, Mr Prez – If gun control actually worked, why have the shootings in Chicago gone up so drastically in a city with the strict gun control in place?”
The answer to this seems pretty obvious–gun control laws can’t possibly be very effective on just a city-wide level, as someone could easily just get their guns in another city. I do agree that Chicago overstepped their bounds a few years ago by completely banning handguns–and so did the Supreme Court. If we look at countries which have stricter gun laws on a nation-wide level, the gun crime rate is significantly lower than it is here. Gun crime has gone way down in Australia since 1996, for instance, and citizens are still allowed to own guns there.
We are in no danger of having guns banned in this country and it is silly and paranoid to argue otherwise. The idea that any increase in gun control, even something as simple and popular as universal background checks (supported by 90% of the American public in poll after poll, including one conducted by FOX News) is just propaganda from the NRA, an organization which used to be concerned with responsible gun ownership but now is only concerned with selling as many guns as possible.
Harold: “I don’t recall ever reading about a criminal going into and shooting up police headquarters, They seem to go where the guns are not allowed, go figure!”
Harold, I think you made some good points in your comment, but there is very little evidence that mass shooters take into account whther or not a place is a “no gun” zone into the equation when picking their targets.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/03/24/nras-gun-free-zone-myth–column/2015657/
The bodies were not even cold — much less buried — when every rat politician from Charleston to Obama was politicizing this horrible tragedy.
#9 Chris :
Re: What a misleading headline. Nowhere in Obama’s speech did he say anything about “grabbing guns.”
Nothing to see here folks. Please disperse. Obama was not talking about gun control at all. Not even hinting at it.
Re : “Please cite the exact Democrats who have proposed banning guns.”
Here is are just two, ignoramus —
“If I could have banned them all – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns’ – I would have!”
– Diane Feinstein
Clearly Obama/s message was not aimed at legitimate, human rights gun ownership in the USA, you stupid and ridiculous knuckle dragging kook rednecks.
“My view of guns is simple. I hate guns and I cannot imagine why anyone would want to own one. If I had my way, guns for sport would be registered, and all other guns would be banned.”
– Deborah Prothrow-Stith (Dean of Harvard School of Public Health)
Well, another post hacked up up by Windblows 8.1 bizarre and unintentional short-cut key errors. God I hate Microsoft.
Washington (CNN)—President Barack Obama and other top Democrats — including Hillary Clinton — find themselves in a familiar place following the mass shooting in Charleston, South Carolina, on Wednesday: Pleading for gun control while knowing it’s unlikely to happen.
“At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this kind of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries,” he said, taking a long pause before continuing. “It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency. It is in our power to do something about it.”
New graffiti choice: White House Lies Matter . . . .
With some appoligies to Dewey, the first article I read indicated the Roof family was from NC, it was not clear that he was residing in SC at the time of the shooting.
Also it has yet to be determined if the hand gun he used was the one his father obtained and gave him, and the loophole of did his father know of the substance charge that would have prevented him from buying a gun is unclear at this time.”
“It’s unclear, of course, if the pistol Roof received for his birthday is the same semiautomatic handgun that police say was used in the Charleston church shooting. If Roof owned guns he acquired prior to his felony charge, he would have been allowed to hang onto them.”
With that said, criminals however will always have a way to access guns, And I point out once more that more laws are not needed, possibly a more timely updating of existing arrest charges that have proven one guilty of crime could resolve some issues.
But I also would suggest, a temporary hold on ones ability to buy a new weapon if one is facing charges, but then removed automatically and filed by the deciding court by completely expunging the TRO if one is proven innocent.
But that’s only going to stop law abiding citizens, the criminals will still have black market access to anything they want. Anyone recall Calif State Senator Yee, who is a total hypocrite for being a gun control advocate and his conviction for gun trafficking.
More Gun control is mostly a political vote gathering stance, and if not for the NRA correcting such liberal rhetoric,every law abiding person who hunts or sport shoots would be doing so with sticks or stones.
Me: “What a misleading headline. Nowhere in Obama’s speech did he say anything about “grabbing guns.””
Pie: “Nothing to see here folks. Please disperse. Obama was not talking about gun control at all. Not even hinting at it.”
Pie, are you saying that there is no meaningful distinction between “gun control” and “grabbing guns?” That strikes me as a pretty radical stance–most conservatives favor at least some gun control.
I suppose I should have been more specific about what was requesting. Your Feinstein quote is from twenty years ago.
I’m not denying that some Democrats wish to ban all guns. But the majority simply want stricter gun control measures.
Harold: “With that said, criminals however will always have a way to access guns, And I point out once more that more laws are not needed”
It might be helpful to think of universal background checks as a way to enforce current law. After all, it’s illegal to sell to a felon, and it’s illegal to straw buy, but since sellers at gun shows are under no obligation to do a background check, these activities are very easy to do without ever being charged with a crime. That’s what happened in the Columbine case.
You’re right that there will always be a black market, but that doesn’t mean we need to deliberately create spaces to allow the black market to flourish right under our noses. That’s exactly what the gun show loophole does.
Chris, I think you are overstating your case.
Criminals buying guns at gun shows is such a miniscule part of the overall crime scene as to be almost insignificant. However, to remove what you call a “loop hole” and force background and registration checks between private parties has a direct and immediate impact on a vast number of law abiding people. It’s an encroachment on the 2nd amendment freedom, its big brother being intrusive once again and opening up a pathway into our lives. It’s setting us up for getting our guns confiscated at some future date and its making us criminally liable if we mess up…we don’t need more liability.
The records on gun owners is forever and it presents a liability to the owner and an asset to an oppressive government…should they decide to confiscate guns. You really need to think about what you are asking for, this is an encroachment on what it means to be free. Freedom comes with risk, it’s always been that way and for the sake of freedom we are willing to assume those risks, but some people with hidden agendas would try to change that. I’m not willing to let them.
My guns equal my property! Until my freedom to own property actually violates another’s [freedom] in some way, I believe the government ought to stay the Hell out of my life!!! They certainly have no right to burden me with a restrictive, freedom robbing law, just because of some other person abused this right. That’s when we need government to step in and punish the offending individual, and not the entire collective of property owners.
Jack: “Criminals buying guns at gun shows is such a miniscule part of the overall crime scene as to be almost insignificant”
I’m curious to know what you’re basing this on. According to the ATF, gun shows are a huge source of crime guns:
“The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) estimates on average 2,500 – 5,000 gun shows are held annually. In general, between 25% to 50% of sellers are not licensed dealers. The access to anonymous sales and the availability of large numbers of secondhand guns makes gun shows attractive to criminals and other prohibited purchasers. A federal study found that 10% of guns used in crime by juveniles were sold either at a gun show or a flea market, and in 1999, gun shows were associated with approximately 26,000 firearms used in crime.”
http://csgv.org/issues/universal-background-checks/gun-show-loophole-faq/
Even Wayne LaPierre used to support universal background checks:
“We think it’s reasonable to provide mandatory, instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes, anywhere, for anyone.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-oqfPojhec
California already has mandatory background checks for gun show sales. How would making this a federal law impact your freedom one bit?
Your argument about confiscation is simply the slippery slope fallacy. It’s an irrational fear. The very real harm currently caused by the loophole outweighs the unlikely and hypothetical harm that could be caused by universal background checks.
Chris you went to a leftwing-loonie site that is run by gun grabbers, and you want us to believe their stats? lol
Try an honest site like DOJ or NIJ: “If you walk along the aisles at any gun show, you will find that the overwhelming majority of guns offered for sale are from federally licensed dealers. Guns sold by private individuals (such as gun collectors getting rid of a gun or two over the the weekend) are the distinct minority.
Yet HCI claims that “25-50 percent of the vendors at most gun shows are unlicensed dealers.” That statistic is true only if one counts vendors who aren’t selling guns (e.g., vendors who are selling books, clothing or accessories) as “unlicensed dealers.”
Liberal Denver congresswoman Diana DeGette says that 70 percent of guns used in crimes come from gun shows. (She lies) The true figure is rather different, according to the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. According to an NIJ study released in December 1997 (“Homicide in Eight U.S. Cities,” a report that covers much more than homicide), only 2 percent of criminal guns come from gun shows.
That finding is consistent with a mid-1980s study for the NIJ, which investigated the gun purchase and use habits of convicted felons in 12 state prisons. The study (later published as the book Armed and Considered Dangerous) found that gun shows were such a minor source of criminal gun acquisition that they were not even worth reporting as a separate figure.
At the most recent meeting of the American Society of Criminology, a study of youthful offenders in Michigan found that only 3 percent of the youths in the study had acquired their last handgun from a gun show. (Of course some criminal gun acquisition at gun shows is perpetrated by “straw purchasers” who are legal gun buyers acting as surrogates for the individual who wants the gun. Straw purchases have been federal felonies since 1968.)”
Chris you were suckered into using phony statistics because you wanted to believe them so bad you didn’t do your due diligence to see if those stats were accurate…shame on you.
Some states such as California require background checks for all firearms transactions, including those conducted between private individuals
How refreshing it would be if the media reported, “Innocent people were murdered in a church,” rather than, “Black people were murdered.” Race should not matter; people…human beings…are dead because of the acts of a deranged fool. Black, white, red, yellow, brown, or green, the significance is this dysfunctional man’s utter disregard for human life.
Meanwhile, as Jack has rightly noted, Democrats from the President on down are calling for stricter gun laws…“Never let a crisis go to waste”.
But how stupid do you have to be to believe that laws prevent crime in the first place? Pretty dang stupid! As was noted on the radio this morning all of the laws on the books have not, and never will, prevent robberies, drunk/drug driving, rape, theft, assault, or murder. Stricter gun laws will not prevent deranged fools from forming a murderous belief system and going on a rampage…isn’t going to happen.
A much larger, deadly problem that has yet to be addressed (Or should I say exploited) by Democrats is the black on black crime and the culture that inspires it! The stupid aren’t any better at realizing cause in this matter than they are in mass murder cases.
I can assure you that gang culture is not a result of NRA classes for kids, classes that teach respect for weapons and responsible, safe gun use.
Tina yes that would be refreshing. But that was not the story we had.
The story is: A white man killed people because they were black. That white man was not just a raging lunatic.
That white man was a white supremacist who left a manifesto and pictures behind.
There were pictures of him burning the stars and stripes of the current US flag.
There were pictures of him with the stars and bars confed battle flag. Some with his gun.
The man killed the people because the were black and the racism that was taught through council of “Conservative” Citizens.
An organization which has been funding many “Conservative politicians” Some like santorum and Cruz are giving the money back or to charity. Acting like they were not aware which is bull. long History follows.
Ouote: “I have no choice. I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight. I chose Charleston because it is most historic city in my state, and at one time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country. We have no skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the internet. Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me”.
So you see this was a white man killing 9 people because he was a conservative and they were black. He left one alive to tell others that exact statement.
Fox news trying to spin this into a war on Christians is sick enough. The spin is failing we are pissed. BTW The Flag is coming down. Americans have had it with the media race baiting people are dying. We have spoken.
The politicians are temporarily giving racist money back but we know where all the race bait comes from in their stump speeches.
“There were pictures of him burning the stars and stripes of the current US flag.”
Mmmmm…doesn’t sound like a conservative to me, so who else burns US flags?
BTW Jack Obama becoming president was too much for the racists? That is all his fault?
No all the racist orgs Storm Front, Council of Conservative citizens, Klan, sons of the confed, all of the sites I have been exploring that clearly state the south will rise, that they hate the US Flag and our Union, are the reason.
Fox news spouting racial hate in code is a reason.
Conservative politicians taking money from these groups and spewing hate in code is the reason.
Worst president ever Is G.W. Bush that man with his 2 wars not on the books, paid for with tax cuts to the rich, loved wall street crash and allowing the jobs to continuously go overseas is the worst President of all time. Obama ordered immunity for GW, that was wrong.
Why is much of this still happening? Oh because the GOP will not allow anybody to pass bills to stop it.
Dewey I am sure there are some people who dislike Obama because he was half-white. You make a good point there. Many in the black community have issues with people of light color…I know its wrong, but we try to educate when we can. However, there are many more that dislike him for more honest reasons, like his extreme leftist background and his poor decision making. He’s been a lousy president and that’s why I dislike him.
Next, help me out here, please tell me what percentage of the white population are white supremacists verses what percentage of the black population that are black militants and as racist as white supremacists?
Harold: “I don’t recall ever reading about a criminal going into and shooting up police headquarters, They seem to go where the guns are not allowed, go figure!”
Maybe you don’t read enough:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/13/us/dallas-police-headquarters-shooting/
Oh and by the way, why do you think they have bullet proof glass at lobby window of the Chico Police Department?
Tina: “How refreshing it would be if the media reported, “Innocent people were murdered in a church,” rather than, “Black people were murdered””
Yes, I’m sure ignoring the fact that this was a racist hate crime would have been refreshing for you. Fortunately, we no longer live in a time where the delicate feelings of white people who don’t want to hear about racism are prioritized over the actual lives of black people affected by racism.
Jack: “Chris you were suckered into using phony statistics because you wanted to believe them so bad you didn’t do your due diligence to see if those stats were accurate…shame on you.”
Ah, using my own words against me. Fair! I should have cited the ATF study itself and not the left-wing activist group’s interpretation of it, you’re right about that. I am fairly certain that they reported the ATF’s numbers accurately, as I have seen the same numbers in multiple other sources, but I’ll have to do my due diligence to find out.
The other problem you could have pointed out is that the ATF study is super old. For some reason I couldn’t find more recent numbers. Given the weakening of the ATF over the past two decades, it’s possible they haven’t conducted an investigation into gun shows as thorough as the 1999 one since.
“Try an honest site like DOJ or NIJ: “If you walk along the aisles at any gun show, you will find that the overwhelming majority of guns offered for sale are from federally licensed dealers. Guns sold by private individuals (such as gun collectors getting rid of a gun or two over the the weekend) are the distinct minority.'”
You did not get this from the DOJ or the NIJ, so I’m not sure why you would imply that you did; this is a direct quote from an article by the CATO Institute. I like some of their work, especially on immigration, but they have a bias when it comes to gun control just as much as my previous source did. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, Jack–criticizing me for using a partisan source instead of the primary source is fair, but then you went and did the same thing, which isn’t.
Chris I used federal supplied statistics I don’t know what else I can do for you? Sure, I interjected opinion and it was obvious it was opinion, but I supported that opinion with federal statistics. Can’t spend much more time on this one, I did my best and if you want more I’ll try when I have the time.
Well if we are going to make claims here about who’s in support of Back Ground checks including a proposal by the NRA back in 1999, we should understand why they stopped their support as well.
Article from 2013 as to what NRA was proposing in 1999 to be included in Brady bill as “Instant Back Ground Checks” and why they do not support current proposed Obama style Back ground checks.
“CNSNews.com) – National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told Fox News on Sunday that the universal gun background check system that President Barack Obama is calling for should be called “the check on law-abiding people,” because it’s going to affect law-abiding citizens.
“We ought to quit calling it right now universal. The real title ought to be the check on law-abiding people all over this country, and then let’s talk about how it’s gonna work,” said LaPierre, calling the universal background check “a failed system.”
Fox News host Chris Wallace asked LaPierre if he was in favor of a universal background check for gun buyers.
“That’s what President Obama’s now putting forward, and let me talk about that. It’s a fraud to call it universal. It’s never gonna be universal – the criminals aren’t gonna comply with it. They could care less,” LaPierre said.
LaPierre said the NRA originally proposed an instant background check system as an amendment to the Brady bill.
He said he doubted that mental health records would ever be computerized so that gun dealers can check patrons to see if they have a mental health issue barring them from owning a gun.
“You know the instant check was actually the NRA’s proposal. We offered it as an amendment to the Brady bill to put it on dealers, and I’ve been in this fight for 20 years,” LaPierre said.
“We supported it. We put it on the books, but I have finally become convinced after fighting to get the mental records computerized for 20 years and watching the mental health lobby, the HIPAA laws and the AMA oppose it, I don’t think it’s gonna happen,” he said.”
I can under stand their frustration of Government failures and probable over reach and evolving policy of dismissing Constitutional rights.
Jack, how do you know CATO reported those federal statistics accurately?
The source I used also based their findings on federal statistics from the ATF, but you dismissed this because you didn’t trust the source. That’s fair, but now you’re saying that trusting partisan sources for federal data is OK as long as they agreed with you? That’s not fair.
I could go to the primary source and see if the federal state actually say what CATO claims, but you didn’t do that with my source, so why should I do that for you?
A little consistency would be nice.
Chris, CATO has been a trusted source and the stats were quoted and linked to the feral sources, so I have no reason to doubt them. Did you check them out? You should and then if you find a problem, please let me know.
Dewey: “That white man was a white supremacist who left a manifesto and pictures behind.”
Yep! Deranged lunatic! You offer him and the organization legitimacy when you recognize his ugly dysfunctional mask.
Chris: “I’m sure ignoring the fact that this was a racist hate crime would have been refreshing for you.”
Ignorant fool! I didn’t “ignore it.” It doesn’t matter in the bigger picture. If a black man’s death is special he is not equal! We fought for the civil rights of blacks in the sixties or equality and so that skin color wouldn’t matter. Since then the left has diligently taught separatism, victimhood, and special rights, and used that as an excuse to exploit race for political reasons. This is racism if ever there was racism! Not much different than the Dixiecrats in the Old South who made black people sit at separate lunch counters.
“Fortunately, we no longer live in a time where the delicate feelings of white people who don’t want to hear about racism are prioritized over the actual lives of black people affected by racism.”
The lives of black people are the same as the lives of white people. Your party insists they are not! This isn’t about not “wanting to hear about racism!” It is about getting beyond the exploitation of black people by the opportunistic lying left! You don’t communicate, you spew left political propaganda. Sadly you can’t let go of this tightly held belief system long enough to open your mind. Apparently, you’re not as interested in equality and inclusion as you are in the divisive, grievance driven group politics of your party. Left politics on race is anything but progressive. Shame!
Dewey: “The man killed the people because the were black and the racism that was taught through council of “Conservative” Citizens.”
That organization, founded by Republicans and Democrats in the racist South. Democrats were the racists in those days. this organization may use the word “conservative” but it does not represent the vast majority of conservatives in this nation. I’d bet less that 1%. Inference that this is somehow significant shows your ignorance about conservatives and their positions on race.
I repeat, the significance is this man’s utter disregard for his fellow human beings. That he was a hateful racist is obvious but so what? He chose to do something that no rational human being, Democrat or Republican would do and used his dysfunctional hatred as justification…an excuse. All murderers go through this process. In the end what’s common about them is the utter disregard for human life.