But this just takes the cake. The man has absolutely no shame whatsoever. For those outside MA, here's the skinny. An 8 year old boy was shot and killed by his 7 year old cousin in the Roxbury apartment where they lived. The kid's mother panicked and told the cops it was a home invasion, a lie which quickly unraveled. There's still some question as to where the gun came from, but one thing is certain: Multiple state and federal laws were broken before the trigger was pulled. The gun was not stored in accordance with MA law. No one in the apartment held a valid MA LTC. In fact, if the half-brother was the one in possession, he's breakin the federal law that mandates handgun owners be 18 (thanks Mulliga!) years old as well as the state law about LTCs (which cannot be issued for handguns to a person under 21 years of age).
Who does Mumbles blame for this?
Why, that convenient boogeyman, the NRA.
“Despite our efforts to get illegal guns off the streets, we continue to see the tragic consequences of the inaction from Congress to do their part,” Menino wrote. “Just this week in my city, an 8-year-old boy was shot and killed by a 7-year-old boy with an illegal gun. Where does it end?”
Yes, folks, you read that correctly. The mayor of Boston is claiming, with a straight face, that the NRA (Mumbles thinks the NRA is responsible for the "inaction from Congress") is at fault for an illegally obtained and possessed gun which was improperly stored in the house of known gang-bangers being involved in the accidental shooting of a child.
Unreal.
And, to the best of my knowledge, not a single media outlet (not even that evil tool of Halliburton Fox News) has called the mayor on this blatant chunk of verbal excrement.
What possible gun law could have prevented this shooting? We've already got ineligible persons, underage persons, improper storage, and I'll bet the gun wasn't even MA-compliant. Nothing short of a complete and total ban on all firearms could have even had the possibility of preventing this shooting, and even that's pretty iffy...
These people were prohibited from owning guns, folks. They obtained the gun in clear defiance of the law, plain and simple. What more laws could we possibly heap on to stop this?
I've got a radical idea, though. Liquarry's father had served time in jail for killing someone in a drug deal. He served four years. FOUR FUCKING YEARS FOR MURDER. I paid for an at-fault traffic accident for seven years, this guy kills someone and only serves four years. How about if we start KEEPING THE BAD GUYS IN FUCKING PRISON??? He's back in prison now for a string of armed robberies. What kind of example does it set that he kills someone and is back on the streets in four years???
But we blame the gun. The inanimate piece of fucking metal. Yeah, that's what's the problem here.
Fuck this. I'm off to the range.
6 comments:
Lets not confuse ignorance with having balls.
He has to blame someone else - anyone else must take the fall for this. That means the easy target of the NRA once again gets the hit. *sigh*
Logic and reason have nothing to do with people like Menino. They go on "feelings". The fact is, even if all guns were illegal, these people clearly were willing to break the law, so it would not matter. They would have the gun anyway and the boy would still be dead.
Of course Menino can't blame the parents... that would be too easy. Not to mention correct. ARG!!!!
Derek,
I'm not so certain it is ignorance.
There's a distinct possibility it's overbearing arrogance - the kind that comes from knowing that no matter what he does, the Globe and Herald will roll over and present for him anyways...
teresa,
It's not just the parents (tho' they do bear blame in this whole sordid mess). The whole freakin' justice system needs an enema. How the hell are these kids ever going to be deterred from joining their family gangbangers if all they ever get are slaps on the wrist?
Liquarry Sr. served FOUR YEARS for MURDER. FOUR YEARS. He was out on the street in less time than most new car payments last for KILLING SOMEONE. And was free to continue his life of crime, which his progeny all witnessed.
What kind of message does that send? No matter what they do, the punishment will be light-to-non-existent. With those kinds of sentences, you'd have to be a chump to go to work every day when it's so much easier to stick a gun in some sap's face and take his wallet...
(Especially since in the Volksrepublik of MA the chances of them running into armed opposition are quite slim...)
AFAIK, there's no federal law that requires handgun owners to be 21. I believe FFLs can only _sell_ handguns and handgun ammo to those 21 and over, but there's no law banning actual possession by the 18-20 set.
I think it's definitely a combination of ignorance and conceit (what you call "giant brass balls"). He has his viewpoint, and there's overwhelming evidence that it's wrong, but he won't budge because of how he's felt probably his whole life. That's ignorance. His mouthing off about it and blaming everyone else to every media outlet that will listen? Sure, that's pretty damned cocky, but it's also ignorant. I hope it comes to bite him in the ass. I can't wait until people finally start to realize that guns don't kill people - they're not rational, thinking beings. They're hunks of metal.
I'm off to the range after work tonight.
I blast a couple of magazines in Mumble's honor.
Post a Comment