Dave Hardy takes on the New York Times editorial on the Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal:
OK, so they had to allow thousands of guns to get to Mexican drug cartels because they didn’t have better databases? I suppose seeing illegal buys and ignoring them (or even pestering dealers into allowing them) is not a “database”? And that agencies cannot stop crimes if they are not on a “database”? Real cops and supervisors do that every day.
This meme about how all we need is better tracing, and more databases, and then ATF can lick this problem doesn’t stand up to the smell test. You don’t prevent crime by mining databases.
I’m glad that Dave Hardy responded on his site to the NYT article. However, would it be possible for him to write a “letter to the editor” stating those exact same points to the NYT?
Since he’s a scholar/expert in the field and well known, would the NYT go ahead publish his “contrarian” view point or does the NYT not participate in balanced journalism?
“…trampling freedom in one of the most precious and private of sanctums, the examination room.”
Markie Marxist sez: “Yeah! We Marxists own pediatric examination rooms! Our pediatricians can grill a kid about mommy and daddy’s gun ownership as much as they please, and then twist what the child says, in accordance with our gun ban agenda! After all, children don’t belong to their parents, they belong to the Marxist state, and we can do as we please with them!”
“We were on the verge of combining inquiries by our pediatrician/intelligence gathering surrogates with safe storage laws to take down one private gun owner after another, for unsafe storage and child endangerment! Does daddy ever leave his gun safe open? Yes, when he’s cleaning his guns. Ha! Ha! Got another one! After all, using child spies to rat out their parents is a Marxist tradition. You’re not against following tradition, are you?”