Fox News' crackpot psychiatrist, Dr. Keith Ablow broke away from his column, called Tragedy in Connecticut: How do children, parents move forward? in order to gratuitously advance his position on gun control and take a swipe at those who disagree.
In his FoxNews.com article, Ablow tries to answer his question: "How do we help the survivors, their families and all the American families whose kids feel less safe today than they did yesterday?"
But then, at the end of his column, Ablow writes:
One other thing: Those who call for gun control after incidents like this contribute nothing to the solution. Gunmen like Friday’s plan their actions, right down to wearing military garb. They could certainly procure illegal firearms or use incendiary devices to kill. I only wish the kindergarten teacher and principal in Connecticut had been armed.
So as the nation recoils in shock, horror and grief over this awful tragedy, Dr. Ablow doesn't just use his psychiatric platform for political purposes but to sneer at those who have a differing point of view. Very compassionate, comforting and healing - not.
At no point in time over the past 24 hours have I heard any of the foxies complain about the lack of information. They have been accepting, without a peep, the cautionary statements by police and informed persons that it will take weeks even months to get the full story of what happened in CT.
Totally unlike their coverage of Benghazi which is not – so far as I know – located within the USA. Just saying.
Apologies for the typos in the last post but was too het up to read it before posting and spellcheck didn’t pick them up. Humans are still better than machines!
Fewer guns would already reduce the risk of situations where bullets are flying around. Please note that did not write “eliminate”. This is simple arithmetic. Fewer guns = fewer situations.
Further reductions in the likelihood of a crazy to commit carnage could be obtained by apply four very easy-to-implement measures:
1) a total ban on the rapid-firing toys that exist only to shoot people in large numbers; anybody who uses such toys for killing deer, ducks, even varmints is – to my mind – potentially dangerous for people; that person certainly does not merit the appellative of “hunter” and most of them don’t even keep their arms in a sturdy locked cabinet;
2) background checks (not a mental assessment which is far too invasive of individual privacy);
3) mandatory training in a licensed shooting range where competent instructors can instill a more responsible mindset;
4) mandatory insurance (as already recommended for the owners of cars and large pets: mind-boggling that the same principle is rejected for guns)
Cue Doug Rowan who I actually do think is paid by the NRA. He keeps on talking about himself as a responsible gun owner to justify his rejection of any form of regulation that would bar ownership by the crazies. No dialogue: only text from the NRA handbook.
Gee…it seems that technically, at least, she WAS armed….but died at the end of her own gun.
Now….what could be wrong with that picture, Ablow?
People like Ablow are insane…and those that believe them are largely responsible for what occurred in Connecticut.
Well, why stop there, Ablowme?
Why not advocate for the kids to be armed, too?