rep gabrielle giffords, d-az, shot in the head in tucson

[kalmn]

violent rhetoric breeds violent acts.

here's a screenshot of sarahpac's website with crosshairs over giffords' district.

http://instagr.am/p/68p0/

federal judge john roll killed by same shooter who shot giffords.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/tpm_confirms_federal_judge_shot_at_incident_in_ari.php

when this happens in other countries, we call it what it is, a politically motivated assassination or assassination attempt.

when it happens here in the us, it's always the act of one deranged loner, acting alone, entirely his own motives, not influenced by anyone or if he was, it was all an accident and whoever said that surely never meant for it to be taken that way.

wake up.

reasonable people can in fact disagree on the issues.

that's not the situation we're in here in the united states.

Comments

[guppiecat]

I don't disagree. However, I have yet to see anything that I consider in that realm. If one person misinterprets another's words as inciting murder, is the first person at fault? Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the situation.

I think that the SarahPac website was in poor taste, but I honestly don't think that it was intended to convey the message "people should kill people in these areas". If it was, it does it exceedingly poorly. I think that it is far more likely that the cross-hair theme was chosen to appeal to the pro-gun demographic that Palin is courting.

To me, it doesn't pass the "reasonable doubt" test. I can understand that it doesn't for others though.