School shooting conspiracy theory

School shootings (Again) offer no explanations.

Gun control lovers fill their tanks on this stuff (State lawmakers push, pull on gun control following NIU shootings).

This time, investigators find a link (Gunman, Virginia Tech shooter used same Web dealer) suggesting that the shootings might have had a third party in common.

Besides well-meaning but misguided Americans, who would like to succeed in disarming the American populace? A foreign enemy, that’s who.

This is a perfect opportunity for the JTTFs to stop training layabouts to act like terrorists (Myths of Domestic Terror) and find the real foreign agents sowing violence in our midst.

Reality check: I have no more evidence than the articles linked above. Nevertheless, weaker leads have sparked investigations. If our enemies are plotting to weaken our domestic defenses by fueling (and, who knows, possibly staffing) the gun control lobby, they are very wise indeed. I stand behind an “individual rights” interpretation of the Second Amendment.

2 thoughts on “School shooting conspiracy theory

  1. Seems a little far-fetched. If the historical context of the writing of the second amendment is followed then in fact the federal government will have no desire to stem the abolition of firearms. The ability of the states or public to raise militia is meant to be integral in stopping the federal government ruling by the sword with it’s armies. So you would think those most interested in disarming the populace would be your own federal government, not some “foreign enemy”. It would have to be a long term plan on the part of a foreign entity in any case, not to mention a really long shot.

    Given the trouble that the might of the US armed forces have had containing insurgency backed by small arms in Iraq, you might consider that the federal governments biggest fear is a well-armed local militia that may oppose them in their own backyard.

    Your suggestion buys in too easily to the idea that your threats lie beyond your borders. This has proved to be historically inaccurate on more than one occasion, usually in the postmortem of a foreign conflict. But that melds well with the general air of paranoia that conspiracy theory usually bathes in.

    I hope you are just engaging in creative writing here, if so you’ve done well.

  2. Creative indeed! While all forms of “theorizing” are basically an expression of creativity, I meant this one to be light-hearted, if not fully untruthful.

    Lately I have grown tired of blaming the American evil empire for everything wrong in the world. Maybe I should pick on Australia? 😉 No, I love your PM.

Comments are closed.