The mass shooting in Las Vegas that killed over 50 and wounded more than 500 concert-goers outside the Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino has become the object of an intense political divide. Liberals signal the incident as evidence that more restrictive gun control is needed, while conservatives largely argue proposed gun control measures would not have prevented the attack.
According to the Washington Free Beacon, Congressman Seth Moulton (D-MA) has stated he will not participate in the House moment of silence honoring the victims of the attack. Moulton called the moment of silence “an excuse for inaction,” alluding to his desire for stricter gun control legislation.
The Democrat Congressman’s decision to refrain from the gesture of respect is identical to his similar act of protest last year when he likewise refused to join the moment of silence for victims of the Pulse Nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida. The massacre resulted in 49 deaths by Islamofascist terrorist Omar Mateen.
Of the Pulse shooting, Moulton wrote on Twitter: “So I’m joining @jahimes in not attending any more House ‘Moments of Silence’ for mass shooting victims. Walked out of my first one tonight.”
The Congressman’s new remark references his earlier act of protest, saying “As after #Orlando, I will NOT be joining my colleagues in a moment of silence on the House Floor that just becomes an excuse for inaction.”
Moulton went on to say “Now is not a moment for silence; it’s a time for action.” Further comments indicate that for Moulton, “action” means passing gun control legislation. On Tuesday, he took to Twitter to state:
“Now that the House won’t vote to make it easier to buy gun silencers, RT if we should fill that slot with a bill to make Americans safer.” Moulton’s words echo the sentiment of many on the American Left who see the Las Vegas massacre as a validation of their desire to limit civilian access to firearms.
But as Christian News Alerts noted, police have yet to confirm what weapon the shooter — Mesquite, Nevada resident Stephen Paddock — used in his grizzly attack. Video footage suggests it was a fully automatic weapon.
Because of the immense federal restrictions on the acquisition of automatic weapons, it’s probable that if Paddock had one, he obtained it illegally. In such a case, gun control laws would not have prevented the shooting, particularly because the legislation proposed by Democrats typically targets commonly-owned rifles and handguns that are misleadingly and artificially labeled as “assault weapons” by the media.
Congressman Seth Moulton (D-MA) will not participate in the House moment of silence honoring the victims of the attack because it’s “an excuse for inaction,” alluding to his desire for stricter gun control legislation. Does this display incredible disrespect for the dead?
Gun control advocates and pundits often cite the AR-15 rifle as one of the weapons that must be kept out of the hands of private gun owners. Although the Left tends to call the AR-15 an “assault” or “military-style” weapon, those terms have little to no substantive meaning and are most often employed as a tactic of shock persuasion than anything else.
The resemblance of the AR-15 and other prominent semiautomatic rifles to military weaponry is purely aesthetic. They are not “machine guns.” Publicly available semiautomatic rifles fire only one bullet per pull of the trigger. AR-15s are not used by the military — they only bear resemblance to the M16 rifles used in the military, which have a fully automatic or a 2- or 3-round burst feature.
Congressional Democrats continue to exploit the public’s unfamiliarity with the distinctions between different types of firearms in order to further their restrictive and oppressive legislative agenda. But their tactics fall flat as more people become acquainted with the facts.