John Cassidy (courtesy talkingpointsmemo.com)

“Which is what got me thinking in the first place about what would have happened if the Tsarnaevs had been shooters rather than bombers. Maybe I am wrong about how things would have played out. But the country, or large parts of it, would finally have been forced to confront its cognitive dissonance about gun violence and terrorism, which, at the very least, would have been educational.” John Cassidy, What If the Tsarnaevs Had Been the “Boston Shooters”? [via newyorker.com]

48 Responses to Quote of the Day: If Only Edition

  1. If only, oh how his type wishes someone would have risen up and killed innocents so the bad people who did not vote correctly would be chastened.

  2. Please correct me if I misunderstood, but did he just basically say ” It’s a shame those innocent people were blown apart rather than shot. A shooting would have served my goals nicely”. And “We” are the evil ones…………

    • Yep! because that is how they think.

      While many of us have wished that nothing at all would have happened, the anti-gun crowd had a party as soon as Newtown happened and hope and pray more happens for the sole purpose to enhance their agenda while at the same time demonize and vilify gun owners and calling us baby killers and racists.

      Perhaps they should hold up a mirror to themselves.

  3. Sounds like something Piers Morgan would say. It is painfully obvious after Boston how much they (gun grabbers) crave tragedy and human suffering so they might have an opportunity to appeal to the emotionally weak and/or otherwise misinformed general populace.

  4. Another moron with nothing substantial in his brain so he turns to the “What if” game.

    What if the knock-off Jihadis opened fire, and an armed citizen in the crowd drew and neutralized the threat?

    What if Luke Skywalker hadn’t destroyed the Death Star?

    What if the moon was made of cheese?

        • Not gonna happen. You need to get a partial lobotomy of that section of the brain before you can run. Explains lot, don’t you think?

    • “What if the knock-off Jihadis opened fire, and an armed citizen in the crowd drew and neutralized the threat?”

      That is exactly what would have happened! There were dozens of armed security people in the crowd that day. The Tsarnaevs would have been killed before they could fire three shots. We could only wish they would have tried to do a mass shooting, because the victim count would have been much smaller.

      John Cassidy is so stuck in his gun-control-ideology, that he can’t see how well an attempted shooting at the Boston Marathon would have supported the gun-rights position.

  5. I think it’s funny how in one of the comments the commenter says you can buy “guns and military hardware on ebay”. While you may get military items you can not buy actual firearms on ebay. I really wish people would get their facts straight before making statements that are just flat out wrong.

  6. I wondered the same thing, since it was just before the big Senate vote.

    If that had happened, I’d be having to start making my tinfoil hat.

    But there was a large police presence, I’m guessing, at the finish line. So MAYBE that was a risk they didn’t want to take.

    Or more likely, they wanted to “bomb and run” so that they could drop another bomb off in New York. And then someplace else.

    After all, they may be terrorists, but they aren’t stupid. Just driven by a radical belief system.

    I imagine after New York there would have been some other kind of bomb. I can think of a whole lot of things you can do with gasoline and styrofoam or other “household items” that would make nastier devices.

    • Their goal was in fact to continue bombing major cities. First Boston, then Times Square, then maybe Philadelphia or Chicago or Washington DC. They would have continued until caught or killed, and their fatal flaw was staying in Boston for too long. If they’d left within that first 24 hours, they’d have gotten away with it–and they wouldn’t have been caught until a few dozen more people were dead.

      • Exactly. These guys weren’t suicidal. And the reason more people didn’t die is that, thankfully, all these home-grown Jihadists haven’t proven to be very good bomb makers.

        So far.

        • It’s not just me tote. And because i don’t want us to end like mogadishu doesn’t mean I favor an overstepping government.

      • Call me an ass, but as long as they’re taking out people who are against the Constitution and anti-capitalist (which would be a majority of the people in the cities you mentioned), I’m not losing any sleep over it.

        • Yes, tote, you’re as big an ass as this ass wishing it had been guns instead of bombs. Are you sure you’re pro gun and pro freedom and not a shill trying to discredit the pro gun movement?

        • I never said I supported what they did or that they shouldn’t be stopped, merely that I’m not torn up about how sad it is that people actively working to make the country a worse place to live were injured / killed.

          I mean honestly, can you really claim that if some group you really hated (the KKK, MAIG, a muslim terrorist cell, etc) got attacked by criminals that you’d be sad about their well being? It’s the same concept.

        • Tote, first of all we don’t know what the victims of the bombing were working towards. Some of them may have been NRA members or progun. Haven’t seen a breakdown on the victims.

          Second, keep making statements like that and you’ll have a lower credibility rating around here than matt. If that’s even possible.

        • JWM, I’ve seen the comments you’ve made in favor of an authoritarian government – I take you having a low opinion of me as a compliment.

        • I’m sorry, what hole do you think I’m in? Do you honestly expect me to feel bad about the deaths or injuries of people who actively work to make this country a worse place to live?

          You’re showing the difference between thinking and feeling. I’d rather make rational choices and have irrational people call me names than to make irrational choices and have irrational people praise me.

  7. And the administration could pretend it was a spree killing and not a terrorist attack as they did with Fort Hood.

  8. Would it be awful to say it’s a shame he wasn’t standing next to the backpack? Yeah, I think so too. Only a libtard would say such a thing.

    • I honestly can’t fathom which would’ve been worse. I’ve seen some pretty bad injuries in my time, and I’ve seen some wounded little kids (most of which recovered well), but I have a hard time even thinking about what shrapnel, exploded at ground level, would do to someone so small.
      I guess that’s why I can’t get along with these anti-gun sociopaths. My reaction to Boston was the same as it was for Newtown: “What the f*ck is wrong with people?!!?” and wondering what skills or mindset I need to take on to fight this kind of insanity.
      These jackholes ban fire-works and pull pressure cookers, and frown because they couldn’t use it as an excuse to try and ban guns some more.

  9. I see. He is hoping to stir up the population so the dems can pass their own Reichstag Fire Decree and Enabling Act. got it. Understand completely.

  10. What if the two bombers had instead assassinated the President, Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, and Michael Bloomberg? They would be heros in my book.

  11. As is the case with many people who think like this bozo, they forget some simple facts. Whether a gun or bomb is used, it is the motivation that counts. Had Sandy Hook been perpetrated by Islamic Terrorists in the pattern of the Beslan school massacre a few years ago, I suspect that society would indeed have been talking about guns, but not the way it was when the shooter was a local nutjob with mommy issues.

    Following Cassidy’s thought experiment, let’s say guns had been used. Well, I suspect the manhunt in Watertown would not have been much different and once the Islamic connection was revealed, it would have been been classified as the Terrorist incident it was. I think Cassidy is underestimating the American people’s reaction to outsiders screwing with us.

  12. Between this and douche Morgan, I never really thought I would read and watch that people were actually hoping other Americans would die to continue a political scheme.

    “The only things that are infinite are the universe and human stupidity, and I”m not sure about the universe”- Albert Einstein.

  13. I like articles like this, because they continue to reinforce our complete and total moral superiority in this fight. Our opposition truly are monsters in every sense of the word, each one just as bad as any murderer or sociopath. The only difference is they haven’t the fortitude to enact the violence they barely contain in their black hearts.

    I wonder how many of them could ever realize that many gun owners are arming up because of people like them.

    As perhaps disheartening as it is to be reminded that so many of our “countrymen” living amongst us are mortal enemies, it’s good to be reminded of it. If/when the inevitable social unrest comes, it’ll be that much easier to give them what they deserve.

  14. A friend of mine posted this article on Facebook. Here was my response to her:

    I’ll go ahead and let the New York Times (who editorially supports gun control) and Senator Gillibrand (D-N.Y. currently proposing new gun restrictions) make the case for me.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/26/us/politics/senators-quietly-seek-a-new-path-on-gun-control.html?hp&_r=0
    By their own admission, their policies are purely symbolic feel-good measures that will do absolutely nothing to curb gun violence. They, like mr Cassidy, are simply driven by a natural desire to “do something”, even if that something actually does nothing.
    Never mind that violent crime has been on a steady decline since the early ’90s. Never mind that rifles of any kind are only used in around 3% of gun-related crimes. Never mind that there’s no functional difference between a standard hunting rifle and the rifles which would be banned under an “assault weapons” ban. Never mind that a recent survey of more than 15,000 police officers showed that “the majority of officers polled oppose the theories brought forth by gun-control advocates…” (http://tinyurl.com/d9t58nx)

    It’s not like nothing should be done. It’s just that stupid things shouldn’t be done.
    And on that note, should we even consider the inanity of an author who refuses to be deterred by the lack of guns in this latest tragedy and proceeds to utilize it to further the cause anyway? I think not.

  15. One of the morons (COMMIE SYMPATHIZER) I work with said we’re lucky these idiots didn’t use AR’s, because then we would have certainly seen a ban. This fool can’t wait for the next mass shooting so that we can all lose our gun rights. He thinks we’re all paranoid and that we just need to call 911.

  16. I hear this sort of crap a lot… I just look at them and pray they’ll get some self-awareness or shame… doesn’t happen.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *