They also said he was a terrible shot.
I’m not even kidding. He tried out for the school shooting club and they asked him not to come back because they considered his poor shooting and gun handling dangerous.
Yeah, I was discussing this with a friend. It’s been 15 years since I fired an assault rifle, but 100 meters with iron sights was pretty easy.
He must either be an awful shot, or his sights must’ve been screwed up.
The first shot was pretty good, almost headshot at 100m+ is not bad at all with an iron sight, moving target and in “not firing range” condition. If he tried a headshot on purpose thats pretty good, not the smartest decision but still good accuracy.
“It makes me wonder why he would carry out an assassination attempt on the conservative candidate.”
Trump is the Republican candidate, but anyone young enough to actually believes in conservative talking points would not see him as a conservative candidate and would see him as a threat to the party.
That is true of some conservatives, which is obvious due to trumps continued popularity.
Some conservatives see trump as a bad conservative. Many see him as a good or even the best conservative.
A lot of conservatives think trrmp is a traitor, too.
I mean, they should. The evidence provides.
But they usually think he betrayed the extremes of their bigotries rather than the country and general decency.
First: As conservatives love bible quotes: Hosea 8,7: “They sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.” Boy, did Trump sow wind everywhere. And Thomas Crooks simply was the whirlwind this time.
Second: Each and every year, about 50,000 people in the US die from guns, and politics f-ing does not care. Because they love the money from arms manufaturers and votes from the gun nuts more than the mostly innocent people who die. But once the wrong asshole gets his ear nicked by a bullet, they suddenly fall over themselves condemning violence.
You’re intentionally conflating suicides–which account for about 2/3 of gunshot deaths annually–and the violence that Trump has repeatedly called for. Both are concerning, but they’re not the same, and should not be considered as such. “Simply” banning the tools of suicide does nothing to reduce the misery.
But gun prevalence increases suicide rates. People who would otherwise not commit suicide end up doing so because a quick and relatively easy way out is available. Should those guns not be so easily accessible, some percentage of those suicides wouldn’t happen.
Those gun deaths are a problem regardless of whether they’re suicide or homicide. And the gun lobby/Trump is perfectly happy with all that death as long as they get their sales/status quo/money. The deaths don’t need to be the same for it to be relevant.
Hangings, knives, carbon monoxide, jumping … The means are still there.
I wonder how many of your downvoters upvoted suicide nets without a thought toward improved working conditions and wages?
