The Greensboro (NC) City Council recently discussed canceling a gun and knife show, held twice annually at the Greensboro Coliseum. Mayor Nancy Vaughan said, after discussing the horror of the Parkland shooting with her daughter and other council members feeling the same way, “We must do something.”
After city council and public comments favoring “doing something,” an African-American man stood up to address the council and attendees. Mark Robinson did not bring prepared remarks to the meeting but had a blistering response to speakers who had preceded him and essentially nuked the gun-grabby city council members.
“I’ve heard a whole lot of people in here tonight talking about this group and that group, domestic violence and blacks, these minorities and that minority, but what I want to know is, when are you all gonna start standing up for the majority?” said Mark Robinson.
“And here’s who the majority is: I’m the majority,” Robinson said pointing a finger at his chest. “I’m a law-abiding citizen who never shot anybody, never committed a serious crime, never committed a felony. I’ve never done anything like that.
“But it seems like every time we have one of these shootings no one wants to blame… put the blame where it goes which is at the shooter’s feet,” said Robinson. “You want to put it at my feet. You want to turn around and restrict my rights – constitutional rights, spelled out in black and white.”
Robinson didn’t stop there and went on to blast some of the remarks made by other attendees, saying that the idea of them wanting to strip him of his constitutional rights was “ridiculous” and that “Rod Serling couldn’t come up with a better script.”
Turning his attention to the city council, Robinson then asked what they were going to do after they disarmed citizens and the criminals still have their guns.
Robinson warned that if the council tried to take his right to bear arms away, he’d “come down to this city council and raise Hell just like these loonies from the left do until you listen to the majority of the people in this city.”
I encourage everyone reading this to Google “Mark Robinson” and watch his full video address to the city council. No matter what side of the debate you are on, he makes a very compelling heartfelt argument.
The Parkland shooting at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School was horrific. A sick, demented young man, Nickolas Cruz, was arrested and accused of the killings. The survivors were rightly angry and distraught, and some have come forward and become the face of “gun control.” David Hogg has made the most impact, becoming the face on TV and magazines, and becoming vile and out of control when spewing hate on the NRA, lawful gun owners, and anyone supporting gun rights – he has said “they have blood on their hands.” If you don’t believe me, check out David Hogg’s comments.
I generally can’t attack a 17-year-old young man who has experienced what Mr. Cruz perpetrated on his classmates. But when you put yourself out there as spokesperson for attacking lawful, law-abiding gun owners, the gloves are off.
Just like I didn’t like President Obama because of his Marxist ideas (unlike how others have implied, I didn’t like him because he was African-American), I don’t like David Hogg’s assertions and ideas, but he hasn’t had enough world experience because of his young tender years and his brain isn’t fully formed. He is undoubtedly intelligent, but wrongheaded (or heavily influenced by liberal teachers/parents and outsiders (Democrat gun-grabbing operatives).
Let’s examine how David Hogg’s blame shifting concept works:
From the shooter responsible to the NRA, legal responsible gun owners, and 2nd Amendment supporters. Why are they being blamed instead of the shooter? Because being the face of the liberal gun-grabbers, they know his sweet, cute little melon being on TV and on magazine covers puts a human face on a despicable act done by a former classmate. No one can blame him for what he has experienced, but now he is attacking an inanimate object instead of the person who committed the crime. Had Cruz not used a rifle, he would have used a handgun or shotgun, which are just as lethal if not more so.
Let’s examine this situation another way;
If there had been an outside gathering at the school and Mr. Cruz had killed 17 students and teachers by running them over with a Ford pickup, by the very blame shifting concept Mr. Hogg has used on guns, the Ford Motor Corporation should be reviled, hated, excoriated, and venomous language piled on Henry Ford and all his family! However, since everyone has at least one or two vehicles and many of them with Ford nameplates, he would generally be ignored, since everyone uses vehicles.
Some will say this is preposterous. I say it is exactly the same, an inanimate object being used in the act of a crime. Nothing more, nothing less. Dead is dead – it makes no difference what weapon was used to make the resulting death and destruction. A human brain and body was needed to make either a rifle or truck the object of creating death.
The difference is in the idiocy of the comments on left side of the political aisle in the aftermath. Constitution and rights be damned; we need to do something! I’m sure the school in Florida had “Gun Free Zone” signs posted on the school grounds (as do many area schools here). To a criminal mind reading that sign it says “you can create death and destruction here with no opposition by an armed person.”
No matter what anyone says, this WILL HAPPEN AGAIN and the only way to stop it will be a good person with a gun. Get the stupid “Gun Free Zone” signs down! And have security staff and/or police with weapons involved in protecting the schools.
And teachers, an active shooter is in the building and your administration forbids any concealed carry within the schools or grounds. You are not allowed to carry. You will be a victim and not able to defend yourself or those students within your room.
You survive and make a statement to the media you are a concealed carry permit holder, but not allowed to carry on school grounds. Many students are killed. Do you want to be the principal/superintendent telling the parent of a dead child you wouldn’t allow a good person with a gun to carry it within the school? When the perpetrator could have been neutralized with only one or a few dying, but because of the rule, he went on a rampage and killed many, many more?
The ignorance of the schools to this problem is staggering. Get busy living or get busy dying – it is up to you to approach your local schools to allow concealed carry and convince administrators of their folly.
I hear the comments of “liability” and “parents will sue” – would informing them their child is dead be better? You, the citizens, must approach your school boards (not the superintendents and principals, they are shills and talk out of both sides of their mouths) and demand action. The administrations of local schools never see a problem, only a solution once the problem erupts into a situation. Will the death of your loved one be the thing to get them out of their ignorant stupor?
The rotting of America from within continues…
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” C’mon, let’s remember what the 2nd Amendment says.
Evidently the Supreme Court doesn’t agree with your interpretation.
same supreme court that gave us George W. Bush? Maybe you, Free Market Man, should focus on the evils of tariffs rather than the wonderfulness of guns. Just sayin. . .