Democrat Rep. Openly Admits He’ll Lie About Gun Facts Whenever He Wants
With the gun debate in full force after the tragedy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School last week, one Democrat representative admitted to using incorrect terminology for firearms.
Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., was confronted for his use the term “assault rifle” to talk about the AR-15, and he responded on Twitter.
“How quaint that some folks are more concerned about kids speaking respectfully than the fact that 17 kids were slaughtered with an assault rifle,” he said in a tweet.
According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, assault rifles “can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire.” Assault rifles have also been banned to the public since 1934, according to Independent Journal Review.
One Twitter user pointed out the representative’s mistake, and Lieu responded: “I will keep saying assault rifle if I feel like it. I will not let you define what I can or cannot say.”
A different Twitter user added that it was a “bizarre move for an elected official” to choose — intentionally — not to use the correct terminology.
Lieu responded that it was “bizzare” that people were more concerned about him labeling guns correctly.
The representative explained that he was going to use the term “in ordinary conversation because I find it to be descriptive,” but will define it correctly when he passes legislation.
Lieu is not the only one who has mixed up gun facts on Twitter.
Liberal author Joyce Carol Oates tried to simultaneously defend the armed school resource officer who stayed outside while last week’s Florida school shooting took place, as well as blast the National Rifle Association in one post.
Oates, whose Twitter feed is full of pro-gun control, anti-NRA posts, took issue with the widespread criticism that the now-former school resource officer has received.
In the process of doing so, she seemed to get confused regarding the difference between an AK-47 rifle and an AR-15.
Assuming that she was not being sarcastic, Oates’ tweet seemed to suggest that it would not be possible for an armed officer to take down the shooter.
Moreover, she was apparently arguing that a school resource officer, who many people would argue is duty-bound to put the lives of students before his own, should not sacrifice himself in an active-shooter situation.
What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for commenting. Your comments are needed for helping to improve the discussion.