But I saw this in the Washington Post's write up on it:
"Castile had a permit to carry his gun, something that sparked internal divisions among members of the National Rifle Association at the time."
Now, I am in the NRA. I remember lots of discussion about that at the time. I don't remember internal divisions. I'm not all over NRAHQ, tho, maybe there were.
I do remember liberals directing flak at the NRA back then for waiting for a few more facts to come in before making a statement on the shooting. And when they made their statement based on what was known they were appalled an innocent CCW holder got shot by a jumpy police officer. Something the NRA tends to frown upon in all cases.
Anyone have any knowledge on internal NRA divisions?
Or is this the Post stealing a march and injecting their own fantastical conclusions into a story instead of facts?
4 comments:
What does "stealing a march" refer to?
In this case, where Leftists appear to have interest in a story and they claim it is for general newsworthiness and human interest, I have to think it has something to do with "Märchen", the German word for "fairy tales".
Was he a legal CCL holder? Reports at the time said he was not. THe article doesn't make that clear.
Not that he should have been shot either way....
The stealing a march refers to the implication that the NRA had a conflict with some of sympathizing with the victim, and others in the NRA on the cops side right or wrong. Maybe I am over reading their tone, but this IS the Post.
And, even with a CCL, that doesn't eliminate the need to act so that the cop is not sent through the intense fear subroutine.
It's a CCL, not a license to assume your good intentions will trump (sorry) everything else.
Post a Comment