This man had no right to fire on these people. He turned a small time theft into murder. Why didn't he just run out the back door and let them do what they had to do?Note the reference to hatred of the world. It could have been taken directly from John Jay Ray's monograph on THE MOTIVATIONS OF POLITICAL LEFTISTS. It is a strange view of the world that equates ramming a stolen vehicle through a concrete barrier into a building, causing thousands of dollars worth of damage, and an unknown amount of damage to the vehicle, a "small time theft". Yet the same person equates a defensive shooting, where no one was killed, into "murder".
Fucking republicans. I hate this world so much.
In this twisted world view, the poster equates destruction of property and theft with "providing for family":
I'd be armed too if I had to be afraid of insane republicans with military weapons firing on me while I was trying to provide for my family.Then the poster invokes class warfare to justify the criminal's actions:
And in case you can't read this man had two, TWO!, stores. I'd also presume that he had insurance. Nobody was going to be hurt until he had to play cowboy.It is easy to pretend that these beliefs are the attempt of an Internet troll to provoke a response. But one sees these attitudes and variations expressed rather widely. I have often seen the "just providing for family" card played by criminals, even though such a scenario is extremely unlikely in the United States, with its extensive safety nets for mothers and children.
No one has to steal in the United States in order to feed children. One of the biggest problems among the poor is that they are obese.
Some children do go hungry. When they do, it is virtually always because their care providers squander the money and food subsidies provided for the children on drugs and alcohol, or perhaps gambling, which are more important to the children’s care providers than the children's welfare.
To justify class warfare, the left continually inflates and exaggerates the amount of hunger in the United States. Political propaganda by the Ad Council pushes the meme. But if you look carefully, you find that the definition of a "hungry child" is based on surveys of parents or care providers, and not on any measure of nutritional sufficiency. No wonder the numbers are so ridiculously high.
©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch