I don't watch Fox News, so I'm usually alerted to their craziness only when Jon Stewart calls attention to it. One of the more hilarious recent segments on The Daily Show was his sendup of Bill O'Reilly's tirade against marijuana and texting. (Lest you accuse me of some kind of liberal TV news bias, I also never watch the garbage on MSNBC, CNN, or the histrionic pap local TV sprays across the airwaves.)
In the Fox News segment, after O'Reilly claims that smoking weed is "literally Russian roulette," he notes that 75% of teenagers have cell phones and text (!). As if marijuana is the gateway drug to texting. O'Reilly then says that American kids should study harder and be more competitive, like the kids in the People's Republic of China (where kids text even more than they do in America).
Well, old white men have heard O'Reilly's call to action and fired the first shots in the battle for freedom from texting. An ex-cop in Florida shot and killed a man for texting during the previews at a movie theater. This appears to be the reason why we need to carry guns wherever we go: a good guy with a gun is needed to stop texting wherever it might break out.
The victim, Chad Oulson, 43, was texting his three-year-old daughter. His wife was also shot in the hand by the same bullet. That little girl sure is precocious, having her own cell phone and able to read at the tender age of three. Too bad her daddy was vile, low-down movie-preview texter, a dog too dirty to let live because he was filling that little girl's innocent mind with poisonous . . . texts.
The shooter, Curtis Reeves, 71, retired from Tampa Police Department 20 years ago. He was arrested and charged with second-degree murder. This is another in a long string of gun madness by crazy old coots, like the old man who shot a 13-year-old boy on the street in front of his mother, or the old man who abducted a boy and held him hostage at gun point in a bunker in Alabama.
The NRA likes to say that guns don't kill people, people kill people. But if Reeves hadn't had a gun in that theater he wouldn't be in jail, and Oulson's daughter would still have her father.
Guns are like a drug. They give men delusions of grandeur, strip them of their normal inhibitions and incite them to violence. Without guns, these old coots -- and probably the vast majority of people who kill with guns -- would never dare attack others with their fists. At best they'd simply be pulled off their victims. At worst they'd be beaten to a bloody pulp. But a gun in their hand gives them the power and the courage to kill on the slightest impulse.
So, I have to wonder. Did Curtis Reeves watch Bill O'Reilly's tirade against texting? Did Fox News incite this old coot to murder a man texting his little daughter?
Yes, I can hear the defense attorney addressing that typical Florida jury of little old white ladies, all Fox News viewers: "Bill O'Reilly told my client that texting was like marijuana, and when that man said he was texting his daughter my client knew he had to protect her from that monster at any cost!"
5 comments:
Are you suggesting we disarm police across the country?
GuardDuck,
In your question, you seem to defend the shooter's activity as an extension of law enforcement.
Are you suggesting police should be arresting, prosecuting people, perhaps even with the threat of bodily harm, for texting ??
How sad.
Wow, that is quite a leap- and quite the example of not reading for comprehension.
I know Nikto's prose can be difficult to follow, especially with it's leaps of logic and unsubstantiated claims. But read it again.
Is Nikto condemning the shooter because he shot someone who was texting? Or as he has done before, and alludes to here, is he condemning people having guns?
Read the last four of five paragraphs. " gun madness by crazy old coots", "hadn't had a gun in that theater he wouldn't be in jail", "Guns are like a drug.", etc, etc, etc.
Nikto is not condemning the shooter because he shot a person texting, he is condemning guns and people with them.
But the shooter is a retired cop. Retired cops get to carry their guns ANYWHERE across the country, just like active cops. Regular civilians don't get to do that, even civilian with concealed carry permits don't get to do that.
Why are retired cops so special? Because they are treated, by the government, just like active cops.
And cops are special snowflakes, right? I mean, Nikto isn't actually saying that we should disarm cops, is he? His anti-gun rant is really just for disarming regular civilians, not cops.
But to the cops and to the government, retired cops and active cops are the same......
So......we have a special government approved snowflake who shot a guy in a theater over texting. And somehow we are supposed to freak out over it because a guy had a gun. But we're not supposed to notice that the guy with a gun is a government approved special snowflake.
So, I have to wonder. Did Curtis Reeves watch Bill O'Reilly's tirade against texting? Did Fox News incite this old coot to murder a man texting his little daughter?
I really do understand that you N are here to prove that M isn't the dumbest one. You don't have to try so hard.
"Fox News incite[d]" this?
Nope. As usual, there is more to the story.
At the hearing on Tuesday, the court heard that Reeves had allegedly confronted a woman at a movie theater last month.
The judge was told that after hearing about the shooting on the news, a woman had contacted police to say Reeves had told her off for texting when she was watching a film on December 28.
Although she didn't make a complaint at the time, the woman claimed Reeves had 'glared at her the entire time throughout the movie and afterwards' even following her to the rest room at one point.
An ex-police officer with an authority complex. Who'da guess it? But he had the magic fairy dust of government sprinkled on him, so the cause must really be them durned conservatives who are being programmed by someone we hate.
Wait. I sense a pattern here.
1) Something bad happens.
2) Mark and Nikto blame conservatives.
3) It turns out not to be conservatives.
4) No retraction. Just deafening silence.
Post a Comment