Since there are certain people on this board who insist on making Kate Steinle's death a talking point for gun control, let's discuss. What killed Kate Steinle? A gun with a mind of it's own? Or an illegal immigrant taking advantage of failed liberal immigration policies geared toward granting reprieve from deportation?
What did the gun do? What if Sanchez had a knife instead? Or a sharpened pencil? If we use the liberal logic that "guns kill" then by that right "computers kill" since they have been used in warfare to inflict mass destruction and take thousands of lives.
Moreover, it must be that cars are are guilty of killing that family of five on the highway, rather than the alcoholic who chose to get behind the wheel while four times over the legal limit. Furthermore, pens kill, because they have been used to write declarations of war.
Cain killed Abel with a rock. So, I suppose the rock killed Abel instead? See where this is going?
Guns are harmless, they are inanimate objects. People however are not. People are quite actively capable of inflicting great harm. But instead we blame the devices they use to inflict that harm. Intentions are more deadly than the biggest gun or the most powerful nuclear weapon on Earth. When you intend to kill, you are the killer, not the weapon you use to commit the deed. The man is more deadly than his weapon. This isn't Poltergeist, the guns don't float in midair and start randomly killing people.
So, what killed Kate Steinle? Francisco Sanchez or the gun he stole? Or what about the liberally backed amnesty style immigration policies being implemented by sanctuary cities like San Francisco? How about the corrupt politicians who set Sanchez free upon the streets? When will we start blaming the real causes of her death?
The fact that liberals are trying to use this atrocity as a means to push the gun control rhetoric shows they have no concern for the life of the victim and more concern with limiting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding American citizens. And just for kicks, read this, and then tell me how effective gun control really is. Until then, keep acting like firearms are like chunks of kryptonite.
Flower power!
What did the gun do? What if Sanchez had a knife instead? Or a sharpened pencil? If we use the liberal logic that "guns kill" then by that right "computers kill" since they have been used in warfare to inflict mass destruction and take thousands of lives.
Moreover, it must be that cars are are guilty of killing that family of five on the highway, rather than the alcoholic who chose to get behind the wheel while four times over the legal limit. Furthermore, pens kill, because they have been used to write declarations of war.
Cain killed Abel with a rock. So, I suppose the rock killed Abel instead? See where this is going?
Guns are harmless, they are inanimate objects. People however are not. People are quite actively capable of inflicting great harm. But instead we blame the devices they use to inflict that harm. Intentions are more deadly than the biggest gun or the most powerful nuclear weapon on Earth. When you intend to kill, you are the killer, not the weapon you use to commit the deed. The man is more deadly than his weapon. This isn't Poltergeist, the guns don't float in midair and start randomly killing people.
So, what killed Kate Steinle? Francisco Sanchez or the gun he stole? Or what about the liberally backed amnesty style immigration policies being implemented by sanctuary cities like San Francisco? How about the corrupt politicians who set Sanchez free upon the streets? When will we start blaming the real causes of her death?
The fact that liberals are trying to use this atrocity as a means to push the gun control rhetoric shows they have no concern for the life of the victim and more concern with limiting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding American citizens. And just for kicks, read this, and then tell me how effective gun control really is. Until then, keep acting like firearms are like chunks of kryptonite.
Flower power!
