I think they both use the shooting situation to their advantage to get more of the spotlight Mark more than Gabby. When I say I understand having someone you love shot & killed I do but what you call for is the scum to be punished not a ban on firearms. I have no respect for either of them (but truly sorry Gabby was shot) just my opinion both are postering for their gain.karder wrote:Not to flame, but I think that calling it hypocritical is a bit harsh. Gabby Gifford did have a terrible and traumatic experience, and I would not be at all surprised if her attitude about guns has changed since the time she was shot. I think that is normal and natural.
Anyone who has been victimized is going to be emotional, but justice can rarely be achieved by victims fueled by rage.. If you are the parent of a child who is murdered or assaulted, your reaction would probably be to do some very violent and unGodly things to the person who hurt your child, but the law does not allow that. In theory, objectively minded police officers are supposed to arrest a suspect, jurors are supposed to determine guilt and a judge is charged with determining a fair sentence.
In the same way, the Constitution and Bill of Rights protects the freedom of U.S. citizens and ensures that emotionally driven citizens and victims rights groups don't strip away our freedoms based on their own fears or experiences. The left tries to portray Gabby Gifford as a knowledgeable voice due to her tragedy, but in reality, Gifford is not qualified to be suggesting gun control policies for the nation specifically because she had a terrible experience which prevents her from being logical and objective in her views.
