Trumps latest claim about the Texas shooting is disingenuous nonsense

[riversedge]

Trump’s latest claim about the Texas shooting is disingenuous nonsense

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/11/07/trumps-latest-claim-about-the-texas-shooting-is-disingenuous-nonsense/?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-b%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.5ce49facfbae

By Greg Sargent November 7 at 10:09 AM
Play Video 1:27



Trump: 'Hundreds more' might have died in Texas shooting under stricter gun laws
During his state trip to South Korea, President Trump claimed "hundreds more" might have died if another man had not been able to "neutralize" the alleged shooter with a gun of his own during the Nov. 5 Texas shooting. (The Washington Post)

THE MORNING PLUM:
...............................................................

Today, in South Korea, Trump was asked by a reporter: “You’ve talked about wanting to put extreme vetting on people trying to come into the United States. I wonder if you would consider extreme vetting for people trying to buy a gun?” Trump replied:

“If you did what you’re suggesting, there would have been no difference three days ago. And you might not have had that very brave person who happened to have a gun or a rifle in his truck go out and shoot him and hit him and neutralize him. If he didn’t have a gun, instead of having 26 dead, you would have had hundreds more dead.”

The claim that there would have been “no difference” if Kelley had undergone “extreme vetting” is another way of saying that an improved gun background check system would not have stopped this shooting. But Trump has no earthly way of knowing this one way or the other. We now know that he very well might not have gotten a gun if not for the Air Force’s catastrophic error. Kelley might have procured one illegally, anyway, or he might not have. Yes, Kelley was confronted by an armed neighbor, but we don’t know how many lives that saved or what that says about the broader background check debate.

.....................................

But here’s what we can say about this: Trump’s immediate fallback on the notion that improving background checks wouldn’t have stopped the carnage is just disingenuous nonsense and bad-faith obfuscation.

The broader policy question here is whether our gun background check system needs improving. What we have learned thus far from this particular shooting is only that there was a system failure that needs to be addressed, and that, because of it, Kelley — a man capable of slaughtering more than two dozen people in the act of worship, children included — was able to obtain guns. If there is any narrow lesson to be drawn, it’s that when there are holes in the system, it enables people who are barred from buying guns to easily obtain them anyway.............................

[Eyeball_Kid]

1. Thom Hartmann reported this morning that...

Kelley, the shooter, wouldn't have killed anymore people anyway, regardless of being shot at by a neighbor, because he'd ALREADY SPENT ALL OF HIS AMMO.

[jmg257]

2. How did he get in the gunfight with the civilian?

"Kelley, who was 26 and lived in nearby New Braunfels, had been wounded earlier when he got into a gunfight outside the church with a man who lived nearby and was armed with at AR-15 assault-type rife Martin said."

"Kelley then fled the church, where he was confronted by an armed man who lives nearby, and a gun battle erupted."

"Martin didn't identify the "hero Texan" who traded shots with Kelley,"


Or do you mean he was out of ammo for the AR? (which he no longer was carrying)?