Tag: Aaron Alexis

Big Surprise… Navy Yard Shooter Aaron Alexis Was An Obama Supporter (Video)

Navy Yard Shooter’s Friend: ‘Alexis Was A Liberal and Obama Supporter’ – Gateway Pundit

.

If you listen quietly you can hear the groans of the liberal media as they are forced to stop googling “Aaron Alexis and Tea Party”.

.

.
Breitbart reported:

Tuesday, on CNN’s “The Lead with Jake Tapper,” Michael Ritrovato spoke at length about his friend, suspected Navy Yard shooter Aaron Alexis. After expressing his condolences to the victims and their families, Ritrovato then expressed his shock over the actions of a man he described as being “like a brother to me” and a “good-natured guy.”

Ritrovato went on to explain that two of them had a close relationship based in part on their differences, specifically race and politics. Alexis was black, Ritrovato is white. Ritrovato described himself as conservative and Alexis is “more of a liberal type” who supported Barack Obama:

I would say things like, ‘You know, you are my brother from another mother.’ And he would say things like, ‘You’re my Italian mafia guy from New York.’ So we had things we joked about: Aaron wasn’t conservative like I am. He was more of a liberal type; he wasn’t happy with the former [Bush] administration. He was more happy with this [the Obama] administration – as far as presidential administrations.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Maybe Piers Morgan should be talking about PC instead of obsessing over AR-15’s

How pathetic is our media? A mad man goes on a murderous rampage, killing 12 people, and the media’s first quest seems to be what kind of gun he used. And while they got that story wrong, largely because of their obsession with demonizing the AR-15, which is just a rifle, they continue to miss the politically correct elephant in the room. Powerline does not miss the most obvious question. How in the Hell did Aaron Alexis ever get security clearance?

According to reports, Alexis was arrested in Seattle in 2004 for shooting out the tires of a parked car. Apparently, he did so in a rage because he felt two construction workers had disrespected him.

The Seattle police said today that it referred Alexis’ case to the Seattle Municipal Court for charges of property damage and discharge of a firearm. But there’s no indication that Alexis was ever prosecuted. And a spokesperson for the Seattle City Attorney’s Office claims that it never received the report from police and so did not review the matter for possible charges.

If Alexis had been prosecuted and convicted, I don’t know that he would have gone to jail. But in a healthy, properly functioning society, he would have served time. And he certainly wouldn’t have walked due to faulty paperwork.

But let’s take Alexis’ situation one step further. If Alexis been convicted of discharging a firearm in public, prospective employers who conduct background checks (including, presumably, the Navy) would likely have learned of the conviction. Given the obvious threat posed by someone who shoots guns at cars because he feels disrespected, rational employers would have refused to hire Alexis.

But the civil rights community and the EEOC are inclined to sue employers whose criminal background check policies exclude black applicants in disproportionate numbers, which most such policies do. As an African-American, Alexis could have been a plaintiff in a private suit or a claimant in a government suit.

Gee I wonder why the media is spending less time asking about how he got the job and security clearance than about the weapon he used. Oh yes, narrative!

 

Navy Yard Shooter(s) Relied On Gun Free Zones To Massacre Defenseless Personnel

Navy Yard Shooter(s) Relied On Gun Free Zones To Massacre Defenseless Personnel – The Examiner

While authorities are trying to piece together exactly what happened and who, if anyone besides dead named shooter Aaron Alexis was involved in today’s massacre at the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., one fact is indisputable. The killer(s) took advantage of a “gun free zone” at not only the facility, but one that extends throughout Washington. D.C.

.

Security at the center utterly failed at stopping a murderer bent on killing defenseless personnel. And even acknowledging special security conditions at a military installation, in the absence of a special legal relationship the government has no duty to provide protection to people it prevents from protecting themselves, meaning there is no attendant liability should they fail to do so.

Add to this the draconian laws of the District that make merely buying a gun an exercise one could write a book about, as The Washington Times opinion page senior editor Emily Miller just did – and that is just for home defense. There are no provisions in the law for citizens to carry firearms, or to have them in their cars for protection on the trip to and from a workplace that forbids them, such as the Navy Yard.

While gun rights advocates could argue that “the supreme law of the land” does indeed provide for bearing arms regardless of D.C. edicts, anyone so much as possessing a spent casing – let alone live ammunition or a firearm – is setting themselves for a world of hurt. That is, unless they are a connected elite anti-gun “Authorized Journalist.”

As the confusing and often contradictory facts get unraveled, as more becomes known of the shooter(s), the motive(s), the timeline, the (unnoticed?) warning signs, and everything else that accompanies a breaking and unfolding story of this magnitude, a second fact also emerges that is also indisputable: the monopoly of violence fanatics are working themselves into full blood-dance/feeding frenzy mode.

And their black doll’s eyes are rolling over white about now…

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
.

Related article:

.
When Did Military Bases Become ‘Gun-Free Zones’? – Big Peace

It hasn’t always been the case that only MPs can carry firearms on U.S. military bases. A mere twenty years ago, “gun free zones” made their way to these facilities under the watch of President Bill Clinton.

According to a Washington Times editorial written days after the Nov. 5, 2009 attack on soldiers at Fort Hood, one of Clinton’s “first acts upon taking office… was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases.”

Clinton’s actions birthed Army regulations “forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection.”

In other words, thanks to Clinton, citizens who join the military to use guns to defend liberty abroad cannot practice their constitutional right to keep and bear arms while on active duty at home.

As the Times editorial board put it: “Because of Mr. Clinton, terrorists would face more return fire if they attacked a Texas Wal-Mart than the gunman faced at Fort Hood.”

The same theme ran true at the Navy Yard in DC on September 16. Police were called after the shooter opened fired, and reports indicate it took approximately three to seven minutes for them to arrive. Each minute is an eternity when a lunatic with a weapon decides the “gun free zone” rules do not apply to him.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.