Previous Post
Next Post


“Parking dispute or hatred of Muslims, we still don’t know what motivated the slaying of three young people in Chapel Hill. But do we know that without a gun, they’d still be alive.” – Michael Daley, What Turned Fury at North Carolina Muslim Neighbors to Murder [via]

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. “Road rage or hatred of Muslims, we still don’t know what motivated the slaying of three young people in Chapel Hill. But do we know that without a car, they’d still be alive.”

    See, I can do it too.

    • If only he didn’t have a knife, they would alive today. Hey, I can play too. If only he didn’t have an ax…a bat….a stick…a rock.. I got it. We should outlaw the possession of rocks.

      • Hands too. Let’s see him kill those people without hands. Wait, could he have used his stumps? Shit. Ok, no arms. Wait, legs you say? Yeah I suppose that’s possible. Ok, without legs and arms, yeah, THEN he couldn’t have killed them.

        So when is the next gov’t sponsored arm and leg buyback?

    • “Parking dispute or hatred of Muslims, we still don’t know what motivated the slaying of three young people in Chapel Hill. But do we know that without a crazed man, they’d still be alive.”

      Fixed that for ya, Mikey.

  2. No. If one or more of them had a gun they’d be alive. It is not the gun. It is not their religion. The guy is a left wing atheist radical. The fact that he supposedly tucked a gun in his pants means he was not likely a legal concealed carrier. But then made I’m just a holster snob 🙂 Tucking a gun into one’s pants in generally not a good idea.
    This mo-ron clearly has anger impulse problems.
    So he could just as easily taken a kitchen knife or baseball bat to them. And how the heck did he get 3 people to sit and wait for execution?
    A lot of unanswered questions. But one thing seems clear, it was not due to the religion of the victims. And the left will move on very quickly because the guy is in their camp, not a tea party fan or a Fox News watcher.

    • Or just blind emotion! Toddlers act the same way as the author. If they don’t like it, throw a temper tantrum fit.. Yet, we are supposed to believe this emotional infant is highly educated.

  3. Well, the point of this article seems to be that this liberal supporter of gay rights would have just kept arching toward justice if it weren’t for the damn gun. They even insinuate he was secretly radicalized by right wing radio, even though there is no proof of that. Also ignore the Santa Barbara shooter, who killed his first 3 vics with a knife, to assert this supernatural ability of guns to kill.

    • While there are right wing radicals, in my experience, average left wingers tend to be much more radical than right wingers. There are far more topics, in federal, I’ve found that a left winger/progressive will be totally ok with forcing compliance to their view and punishing the expression of dissenting opinion.

      This isn’t just the extreme elites, this is normal folks I’ve known and discussed politics with, But I have never known anyone who leans to the right to any degree who wanted to silence dissent or forcibly compel behaviour of others.

  4. Wouldn’t anybody who’s willing to gun somebody down, over a parking space, be just as likely to run somebody over, over that same parking space, were a gun not available? So how would anyone still be alive in the absence of a gun? If anything, a gun in the victim’s hands may have saved their lives.

    Really, only about 20% of the human body is even vulnerable to in the sense of causing near immediate death if struck by gunfire. In a major city, with emergency services readily available, your basic gunshot victim has roughly an 80-95% chance of survival. That’s likely lower with intentional gunshots, of course, but still, the odds are in your favor.

    Compare that to being run over with a car. That could easily be an all-body injury with massive internal bleeding and external burns. That’s tough to survive.

    I’m sorry these people were killed, but let’s be honest here: the root cause of death was the killer, not an object, and the gun was not even the most dangerous object on the scene.

    • Interesting line of reasoning. A handgun – as an offensive weapon – is NOT as lethal as a car or some other uncontrolled objects. Conversely, a handgun – as a defensive weapon – is superior for its versatility to other objects.
      The “substitution effect” is not well-understood by the layman. It’s hard to explain in a 45-second sound bite. Even so, let’s try to make Jonathan’s point. Suppose we tell the story of how little difficulty murders have had in using their cars as weapons. (A recent case involving a celebrity comes to mind.) Suppose we tell the story of Amanda Collins (and her two succeeding victims of the same rapist); how nothing short of their handguns in a gun-free zone would have enabled them to defend themselves. Maybe story-telling of such contrasting cases would overcome the 45-second attention-span of the uncommitted voters.

  5. McDonald’s or burger king. All we know is without them this gentleman would have a normal looking head and chin

  6. Well. I see alot of jumping to conclusions by people on both sides of the debate.

    I didn’t see anything about the details of the shooting from the other mans perspective. Did he feel threatened in some way by the three others? Was it just a parking space rage shooting incident or dId the man feel truly threatened by something three were doing.? It wouldn’t be the first time that evidence of a gun or a knife was removed by the assailants friends before the police arrive.

    If it was just a triple murder by a “equal opportunity hater”, then I would blame him being a liberal. They are so angry about so many things combined with poor impulse control. Just look at his eating disorder.

    I think the movie “God bless America” is a good snap shot into the heart of many liberals. It was the story of a man that sounded alot like this guy that had a hatred for rude people and how he, with a young girl , goes on a shooting spree, murdering people not because they were physically threatening him, but because they were being “rude”.

    This man could be the manifestation of the murderous fantasies so many liberals have. Just look at the constant call by liberals for the whole sale slaughter of gun owners.

  7. Blah, blah, blah. The gun is an evil talisman. The gun provided him the means to kill those three young people. Hardly more than children really. The gun gave him the confidence to murder like no other weapon could have. It is too easy to kill some one with a gun. It’s the gun lobby’s fault. Blah, blah. blah.

    These stories are look very much like a Mad-Lib. Without checking the reference for facts: 29 people killed by concealed carry permit holders in 7.5 years does not seen like a epidemic.

  8. Ah, what a paradise it must have been in the days before the gun was invented. Back then, it was impossible to kill another human being, since the only tool capable of the job didn’t yet exist. Makes one wonder why they coined the term “gun violence”, since all violence comes from guns, doesn’t it?

  9. I suspect the shooter didn’t have a whole lot going for him. Couple that with a minor dispute, parking or otherwise, and you have an individual who might blow an “injustice” out of proportion.

    I liken it to the teenage girl who accidentally “snorted while laughing in front of Bryan, so my life is like so totally over.” Minor things seem like the end of the world when your perspective is narrow.

    He’s still not justified, and teenage girls usually don’t kill over such things either.

    Although there was that one time with that one girl in high school. Things got tense.

  10. yep it was that evil gun’s fault, just like it was the local McDonald’s fault that he is rocking that very impressive double chin.

  11. Well, you all have it pretty well covered. But this did set me to wondering just how many different objects the phrase “blunt instrument” covers…

  12. Yeah well, without Islam James Foley and countless others would still have a head, but that isn’t stopping you from supporting Islam now is it daily beast?

  13. The shared fundamental belief between gun haters and gun toters is the mistrust of fellow man. One key difference is that the gun haters’ mistrust is a projection of self-mistrust.

  14. But do we know that without a gun, they’d still be alive.” – Michael Daley,

    i guess there is only one way left to kill people, Who knew?>
    I must be pretty dense because I’m not sure if Daley is suggesting that if guns disappeared no harm would have befallen these people.

  15. “But do we know that without a gun, they’d still be alive.”

    And how do “we” know this? Did he not have the common household ingredients necessary to build a bomb? Did he not have a vehicle capable of running someone over? Did he not have the means to start a fire? Had the man not had a gun, the CIRCUMSTANCES may have changed, but there is no guarantee that the ultimate outcome would have been any different.

    Put another way, if a man is to the point where he values the lives of his neighbors less than a parking space, why would we assume that prohibiting access to a specific tool will prevent bloodshed? Gunpowder was only developed 1200 years or so ago, whereas murder has been with us ever since Cain slew Abel.

  16. I have read his bilge for 25 years. He once wrote a great metro-sexual hit piece on hunters and recanted after trying to hunt pheasants and almost passing out from the walking. After he ate THAT crow sandwich with fecal sauce he relented for a few years but now feels emboldened.

  17. Hardly worth a response. If that beast didn’t or couldn’t have a gun, he could have used a knife, bat, car or ANYTHING that could cut, stab, poke, clobber, crush with.

  18. Cyber Bullying……..all we know is without the internet, those kids who committed suicide would be alive. See I can too mix words up to make you believe its something elses fault than what it really is. Another example……sunscreen or not, all we know is without the sun people wouldnt get skin cancer as much. You can literally take anything in life and twist it. Speeding or not, all we know is without cars we wouldnt have accidents. This might be the dumbest least thought out response or excuse Ive ever seen. journalists are getting dumber by the day

  19. First they wanted to blame hatred of Muslims so they could get their “MuslimLivesMatter” hastag. Now that it isn’t working out, back to guns.

    • No it was always about guns, the left just finally thought they had the perfect racist, right-wing, gun nut poster guy to use to hold up as a representative of all conservatives. Unfortunately for them it turned out he was very left wing guy so the narrative they wanted to weave fell apart, so they are stuck having to go back to the less sensational narrative of “because of guns”.

  20. Sue Ford Motor Co. as the mass production Henry conjured provided the root cause. The anti-gunners are so sleazy and unsophisticated to slam firearms while people mourn and experience grief. All the while knowing in their hearts control means confiscate and eliminate.

  21. Without a gun, Suge Knight’s victims would both be alive and not dead or hooked up to life support. …Oh, wait a minute!?

Comments are closed.