Star Talk
Ever since the shooting at a theatre playing Trainwreck, star Amy Schumer (who is, indeed, related to Chuck Schumer) has spoken out about guns.
She backs a law designed to make it harder for violent criminals and the mentally ill to get guns. Schumer is far from done speaking out.
These are my first public comments on the issue of gun violence, but I promise you they will not be my last.
I wish they were. The shooter did a horrible thing, but it would have been no less horrible if he shot up the theatre playing Pixels, in which case, I suppose, we might today be discussing the gun views of Adam Sandler, Kevin James, Michelle Monaghan, Josh Gad or Peter Dinklage.
Schumer is certainly free, as a citizen, to speak on any issue she wants. But her tangential relation to the shooting gives her no special insight or power. Reporters are not obliged to report on what she says, and we're certainly not obliged to listen.
posted by LAGuy @ 12:04 AM
8 Comments:
Houser had a domestic disputethat led to an "order to apprehend" in GA in 2008. This means his family alleged he was threatening them, and the Court ordered that he be investigated (including a mental evaluation). Apparently nothing more came of this and there were no further issues with Houser and his family.
Would the Schumers (Chuck and Amy) have the law state that as the result of a mere accusation of domestic abuse, a person shall be deprived of their second amendment rights for the rest of their lives?
People with intent to do harm will always be able to get guns. I'm not against baarring felons and dangerous, mentally disturbed people from losing their rights to possess guns, but surprise surprise, most felons don't mind breaking that law to get guns. Houser, however, was just a sad, angry man who snapped - still less likely a way to die than getting hit by lightening.
Discussing the substance of this issue is what I was trying to avoid, my point being no matter what you think, there's no reason to pay special attention to a celebrity.
But since you bring it up, I'd say the very essence of the argument of the Schumers is that, rather than throw up our hands (as you apparently do), we have to do everything within our power to make sure that people with intent to harm will never be able to get guns. The question then becomes how far can you go and how well will such laws work.
Also, please note that getting hit by lightening mostly happens when you put too much bleach in the laundry.
Sad angry cable TV right winger with a woman problem
I don't think that's a fair characterization of Any Schumer.
What do lightening strikes have to do with bleach? Is this another of your damnable correlation insights?
Do you not get it or are you just playing along?
Yes.
The lightebulb just went off.
Post a Comment
<< Home