Want more hot BPR News stories? Sign up for our morning news blast HERE
With investigators still sifting through the evidence of the deadliest shooting in U.S. history, the liberal New York Daily News has declared the National Rifle Association is responsible for the Islamic terrorist attack on the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Fla.
Never mind that the gunman, Omar Mateen, called 911 before the shooting to pledge his allegiance to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and law enforcement sources told Fox News he shouted “Allahu Akbar” while engaging officers.
The Daily News posted this insulting headline on social media late Sunday:
A look at tomorrow's front page…
— New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) June 13, 2016
A few critiques of the Daily News article on social media shared some critical information the newspaper ignored or downplayed:
The word “jihad” appears twice here, both to describe the NRA. Nothing about the actual killer. Pathetic. https://t.co/gDjt2PZ5mr
— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) June 13, 2016
Things that are missing from this front page:
1 – his religion
2 – his political affiliation
Yet the NRA is https://t.co/4VqVADNCdx
— The Real Bepo (D) (@TheRealBepo) June 13, 2016
— Ale✘ Furlong (@RoombaWithAView) June 13, 2016
The renewed fury over gun control began with President Barack Obama, who eschewed the term “radical Islam” when speaking on the Orlando shooting but was quick to push his gun control agenda.
“The shooter was apparently armed with a handgun and a powerful assault rifle,” the president said in his prepared remarks. “This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school, or in a house of worship, or a movie theater, or in a nightclub.
Bearing Arms editor Bob Owens wrote that it was “predictable that Obama would use the Islamic terrorist attack on the Pulse nightclub to attack the gun rights of law-abiding citizens who don’t hate anyone, and who have committed no crimes.”
He also debunked the myth that an assault rifle ban wold have prevented Sunday’s deadly attack.
“The 1994 ‘assault weapons’ ban was nothing more or less than a ban on some firearms by name, and others by a combination of purely cosmetic features,” he wrote. “That may sound absurd, but it’s entirely true.”
Owens said the 1994 “assault weapon” ban signed into law by former President Bill Clinton was “a paper tiger that protected no one” and wouldn’t have made difference.
“The same holds true for the ‘assault weapon’ bans so frequently and impotently proposed by President Obama or Democrat front-runner Hillary Clinton,” he added.
Sign up for our morning news blast HERE
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.