President Obama had a town hall meeting on gun control. Shortly thereafter, a man shot a police officer in Philadelphia. Wow, perhaps this adds an exclamation point to his argument. No, as a matter of fact, it undermined a slate of talking points from the administration.
Problem 1: It turns out that the gun was stolen from the home of a police officer. Nothing the president suggested could have any impact on that. In fact, short of disarming the police or perhaps requiring them to leave their guns at the police station when off duty would have had any impact on the shooter getting the gun.
Problem 2: Edward Archer is black and shot a white officer. The incident is a reversal of the claimed epidemic of cops shooting black men. What story might we have been told if the shooting hadn't been caught on camera and the officer's return fire had killed rather than wounded the shooter? Keep in mind that the Ferguson shooting was not on camera and the initial story bore almost no resemblance to the truth.
Problem 3: Archer proclaimed that he shot the officer "in the name of Islam" and also pledged his allegiance to ISIS, again demonstrating that ISIS is not contained nor is the homeland safe. Of course, the mayor of Philadelphia declared that - despite the shooter's claims - the shooting had nothing to do with Islam or its teachings. Why is it that every time someone claims to be acting in the name of Islam, a non-Muslim politician becomes an Islamic theologians who can assure us that such incidents have nothing to do with Islam?
Everything about this shooting weakens the Democratic Party's favorite narratives. Luckily, it is already old news now and we'll not hear about it again.
No comments:
Post a Comment