More Guns Work, And the New York Times is Sad

Good guys with guns stopped a bad guy with a gun. With guns. It happened, and it is front page news.

But the New York Times is not happy. Hell, the church was named after a freeway, and is in a town named "White Settlement." How dare any of them church folks there even think to defend themselves against a massacre? Especially with guns. No wonder the "progressive" New York Times editorial staff are apoplectic.

But, on the facts, this occurrence makes a few good points. First, the Second Amendment is legal authority of constitutional dignity. Second, there is no way to prevent mentally addled persons getting their hands on guns and going on the attack. Particularly so, given the "progressive" rhetoric that encourages such violence against church-goers (or anyone else who does not embrace the current ideology of the extreme left). Hence, it is not a bad thing that people peacefully involved in protected First Amendment religious observances in White Settlement can exercise their Second Amendment rights to defend their lives against the hateful, murderous rats that "progressives" have incited against them.

As I see it, this incident demonstrates how more guns make for more security. At least, so long as the hate-spewers like the New York Times are inciting mentally unstable people to violence.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/inside-a-texas-church-guns-bibles-and-a-spirited-firearms-debate/ar-BBYtmdR