Thursday, January 7, 2016

George Zimmerman in the headlines again - A "rant" about Obama's tears

How Zimmerman must feel about Obama
Obama's tears over gun control, while the parents of the children killed at Sandy Hook stood behind him, practically trended on Twitter yesterday.  Two schools of thought, people either thought his tears fake or sincere.  Thousands commented and many media outlets and bloggers opined, one reporter even sought out the opinion of George Zimmerman, who laughs at the prospect that he has apparently become the go-to person when it comes to Obama's statements on gun control.  Maybe it is because Zimmerman epitomizes, thanks in large part to Obama, the lengths to which the press and politicians (with the help of willful social media idiots), will go to strip us of our right to self defense.

The articles written about Zimmerman's statement concerning Obama's speech, and the tears he shed, make it sound as if the reporter randomly came upon Zimmerman somewhere after the speech and observed him ranting and raving about what Obama said, and the manner in which he said it.  If you know George, and I have for over two years now, you know he doesn't "rant" and I have never heard him so much as raise his voice, even when most people, including myself, would have.
TMZ article:"Zimmerman, was leaving a shooting range near Orlando when he unloaded on a photog about what he calls Obama's phony, emotional outpouring over the Sandy Hook massacre during Tuesday's gun control news conference. 
Zimmerman, the infamous shooter of Trayvon Martin, went even further with his rant -- taking issue with a bunch of things Obama said, and one thing he did NOT say."
rant verb  speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
"she was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all" synonyms:
Rant?  I think not, he's just a guy practicing his first amendment right to emphatically express his opinion concerning his second amendment right, which includes his opinion of the Commander in Chief.

What Zimmerman opined yesterday is felt by many, including myself.   Zimmerman was upset, in part, by the President's neglect in addressing Ft. Hood, where their gun control policy rendered a base full of civilians and troops defenseless, resulting in their being murdered by a single terrorist with a gun.   The same was true in the Naval Yard massacre - a gun free zone where defenseless victims were sitting ducks for a rogue assassin.

Obama's tears seemed not so much fake to me, but arguably insincere given the opportunistic usage of a select few "white" parents to garner support for his gun control stance.  They seemed insincere because there are hundreds of mostly black mothers and fathers whose innocent children have been killed by illegal guns in US and, unless there is a political agenda, their grief is rarely addressed by media, much less by out President.
Tears shed to feed a narrative
These children, killed daily in Chicago and other high crime, gang infested areas in the US, have never summoned a single tear from our concerned President.

Sandy Hook, Newtown, Virginia Tech, and every loss of innocent life is horrific, and my heart goes out to the families of those who were summarily murdered, but what about the number of people who have survived violent attacks, or protected their families because they were able to defend themselves with their guns?  Statistically, that number is much greater than the number who die defenseless.  Victims of gang shootouts are not considered "defenseless" in the count.
According to The Guardian, "Not even the police are safe in Venezuela. In a country which saw 24,000 murders recorded in 2013 and whose capital city Caracas was runner-up for murder capital of the world,   252 security officers have been killed in the country from January until October this year, in most cases simply because they were carrying something valuable – a gun.
When President Maduro launched a disarmament plan in 2014, and security forces were also ordered to destroy weapons seized during the police operations, the government’s intention was to reduce violence by making it harder for people to obtain guns. His predecessor had already made private gun ownership illegal in 2012."
Even if you take the guns away from criminals, it seems they will take guns away from those who are legally in possession of them.  What is the answer?  Allow everyone, who can do so legally, purchase protection, we are too far past any other workable solution, in this blogger's opinion.