Santa Monica College Shooting a Good Thing Says Senator Barbara Boxer

Courtesy AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
Courtesy AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Each time a mass shooting occurs in the United States, emotions are stirred. The public and the politicians alike hang their heads and wonder where the answer lies. Gun ownership should not be a political issue, since it is a right enshrined in the Constitution. Healthcare is not a right; unemployment benefit is not a right; receiving food stamps is not a right, but being able to purchase and – if you so choose – carry a firearm is a right. While those who support the Second Amendment point to the fact that mass shootings are not on the rise, despite a steep rise in gun-ownership,  and that such incidents always occur in “gun-free zones”, those who wish to disarm the public wring their hands and cry crocodile tears. The truth is that gun-control advocates jump for joy every time there is a mass shooting, as demonstrated by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) on Saturday. In her eyes, the Santa Monica College shooting was a good thing.

Speaking on MSNBC a day after the Santa Monica College shooting, both Senator Boxer and host Karen  Finney clearly looked at the recent shooting in California – which left five dead, plus the shooter – as nothing more than an opportunity to advance a political goal. As a side note; it is worth remembering that Finney is a former spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), which speaks volumes of MSNBC’s standing as a serious news channel.

The conversation between Finney and Boxer was actually chilling in its lack of emotion and eagerness only to score a point against gun-ownership. Finney opened the discussion with no shame; diving right in to the question of how this tragedy could be put to use by the anti-gun lobby: “…obviously, there was a horrible shooting event yesterday in Santa Monica, California…um…and just wanted to get your thoughts on that and do you think that this may reinvigorate…ah…the conversation about gun safety regulation?” To Finney this was a “shooting event”. In true Progressive fashion, she had managed to efficiently de-humanize the entire incident. The fact that people died clearly meant nothing to her at all.

After offering a few cursory words of sympathy for the families of those who were killed by shooter John Zawahri – in that detached way that only politicians, Democrat or Republican – can do, Senator Boxer immediately expressed her exasperation that the recent Sandy Hook massacre of 27 people – 20 of them young children – had not been sufficient to fulfill her ambition: “…if we didn’t do the right thing after the last unbelievable slaughter of innocent children in Sandy Hook, I worry about it. However, we never give up…we never give up hope…so every single time something like this happens I think it does give us wind at our back, and we’re not going to forget about it.”

Boxer worries about it. She doesn’t worry about the parents, grandparents or siblings of the victims; she worries that all those dead children did not achieve her agenda. Without actually saying the words, Senator Boxer was telling Finney that the Santa Monica College Shooting was a good thing.

People like Boxer do not see ordinary Americans as living, breathing individuals; they see them as breeders, consumers, workers and – of course – voters. Boxer, along with everyone who thinks like her, is, no doubt, praying for the next mass shooting, which will provide them with more wind at their backs to complete their goal of depriving law-abiding American citizens the ability to exercise a constitutional right.

Written by Graham J Noble