Lately, I have noticed much frustration and anger from gun control supporters. Most of those who are speaking out have suffered terrible life changing personal loss at the hands of a gunman, so it is not my intention to offend them.
Whenever they try to appeal to people's emotions, they usually cite a list of the recent mass shootings. It usually includes all of the recent nationally publicized mass shootings, often listing the shootings at Newtown, Aurora, Tucson, Columbine, and Virginia Tech. Why do they seem to always leave the Trolley Square shooting out of their list? It happened in 2007, it is considered recent, and it happened between the shootings at Columbine and Virginia Tech.
I would expect it to see it there on their list. Is that intentional? Do they not care about Utahans? Is it not considered a tragedy when Utahns are killed? Thinking about this, the answer came to me.
In the Trolley Square shooting, someone with a gun actually stopped the gunman and saved countless lives. It seems to me that they don't want to remind us of that particular shooting. They don't want us to feel that sometimes people carrying guns can stop more tragedy, and save lives. They're trying to manipulate our emotions. What other information are they intentionally leaving out of statistics?
I know the NRA uses emotional campaigns to manipulate people's emotions, but I think people fail to realize that the president, and the gun control activists are just as guilty of it. Many don't realize they are doing it until they really stop to think about it. I wish we could get complete, unemotional, and unbiased facts.
We are bombarded with emotional campaigns, and it needs to stop. No one makes good decisions when they are in an emotional state. I think some senators felt the same. Could that have contributed to some of them unexpectedly voting "no"? They are now ridiculed. Is this an example of how activists are trying again to manipulate our emotions to vote to get those senators out of office?
Darin J. Evans