Thursday, August 8, 2019

Why are the shootings in Chicago assumed to be criminal acts?

After every mass shooting, conservative gun nuts descend upon social media like a pack of angry howler monkeys to shout down anyone who makes the obvious connection between more guns and more gun violence.

One of the favorite talking points for gun nuts is to proclaim Chicago. Now... Why do conservative assume the gun violence in Chicago is "Criminal" and not a "DGU"?

DGU stands for Defensive Gun Use and Chicago was the home of the second major 21st century SCOTUS case (McDonald v. Chicago) which redefined the 2nd Amendment as meaning Government can place no limitations on gun ownership.

Of course, the answer is simple; Chicago when used as a rebuttal by gun nuts means Black and conservatives believe all Black People are a priori guilty of crimes ergo any time a black person shoots a gun or even has a gun it is a criminal act.

There is literally no way for any gun nut to know the circumstance of every shooting reported in Chicago, yet every shooting is assumed to be a criminal act. Now you might retort the gun nuts are reading police reports which highlight gang activity or the shooting was a killing over turf or the victim was not the intended target but, that seemingly goes against standard conservative orthodoxy in respect to the government.

Conservatives claim they don't trust the government but, in fact, their trust is merely conditional. When a Police Officer kills a black person conservatives who-heartedly accept the government's accounting of the incident. When the government incarcerates thousands of children in concentration camps, for the temerity of being refugees, conservatives absolutely believe the governments' reports.

Chicago is but one of the man go to "arguments" gun humping lunatics trot out after every mass killing. Video Games, lack of school prayer, mental illness, semi-automatic vs. assault weapon nomenclature gotcha moments also round out their repitoire of bad faith retorts or just outright shamelessness.

No comments: