Jim Acosta Tries to Match AR-15 Wits With NRA Board Member Who's Also a Judge
In this episode of “‘Deary Diary,’ With Jim Acosta”…
Before we begin, I must admit I was a bit wistful as I began to write, longing for the good ol’ days when CNN’s TDS-riddled Jim Acosta got his ass handed to him by Donald Trump on a near-daily basis. Always humiliated beyond the point of embarrassment for most people, the undaunted Acosta bravely ignorantly returned to do battle with Donald the next day — which always ended just as badly as the day before.
Anyway, as our story unfolds, Acosta tries to play AR-15 “gotcha” with NRA board member Phillip Journey, currently the Division 1 Judge of the 18th Judicial District Court. here’s how Jimbo framed it in his tweet:
ICYMI: I asked an NRA board member why an 18-year-old should be allowed to have an AR-15. He didn’t have any real answers.
We have now landed on Planet Acosta, RedStaters.
Conversely, here’s how “Trump4America” saw the exchange between Acosta and Judge Journey:
Jim Acosta always tries to play gotcha.
And as usual he looks stupid.
I’m gonna go with Trump4America on this one.
Here’s how the conversation went down, as transcribed from the above video(s), with Acosta trying to build his entire case on the forever “evil” AR-15 [aka: “assault weapon,” “weapon of war,” “scary-looking gun”]:
It keeps coming back to the AR-15 and similar models. Why do people need an AR-15, anyway?
Stop the tape. Gun-grabbers will never understand it’s not about “need.” It never will be, but let’s continue.
Judge Journey: You know, it’s just a semi-automatic rifle, but if you want to be prejudiced about the way it looks … I was aware of what happened in the ’94 semi-automatic firearms ban … and there were rifles of similar function that just didn’ look as ‘ugly’ … they weren’t black guns, like a Ruger Mini-14. And of course the Ruger Mini-14 was appropriate and an AR-15 was not.
Acosta: I do want to ask you about ‘assault weapons,’ but on the AR-15, how is it that an 18-year-old can buy an AR-15-style rifle and have 1,600 rounds of ammo, like we saw in Uvalde?
The judge: Well, he did not have any prior convictions; he didn’t have any prior issue that would have kept him from purchasing one. It’s my understanding from the news that he purchased it through a firearms dealer. He passed a background check because he didn’t have any prior convictions.
Acosta: Right, but should an 18-year-old have an AR-15? What’s he gonna do with it, go duck hunting? [Not smug, at all, Jimbo.]
The judge: I don’t know; should an 18-year-old have one in the Army?
After Acosta suggested the difference is that 18-year-olds have “military training” in the Army, while the Uvalde shooter presumably had none, Judge Journey got to the bottom line of the entire issue.
The fact is, these kinds of issues are far more complicated than whether we remove something from the public. [Acosta then tried to talk over the judge, smugly saying: ‘You can’t buy a beer’] These issues are far more complicated than easy answers.”
Acosta isn’t the Leftist Lone Ranger in dwelling on the age of the shooter, of course, but let’s remember that the shooter’s age was irrelevant in the sense that he could have been any age and the gun-grabber crowd wouldn’t have missed a gun-grabbing beat. They never do.
As luck would have it, more than a few Twitterers dutifully ripped Acosta to shreds. Among the best:
If a 2-year-old can decide their gender, an 18-year-old can buy a gun.
I’m not generally a fan of playing the #whataboutism card, but Jimbo?
“Kimberly” schooled Acosta over his flawed “beer” analogy.
Because it’s an 18-year-old’s RIGHT as a LEGAL ADULT, protected by the 2nd Amendment. Drinking alcohol isn’t a right. You gun controllers NEVER focus on the REAL issues, like WHY he did it…
Excellent point.The motivation — not the mechanism.
So, at end of yet another misguided adventure, poor Jimbo no doubt took to his diary to commiserate with the only person he admires — himself. But the song remains the same on the left and it always will: the exploitation of horrific acts of violence and blaming firearms for evil committed by evil people.
As I suggested in my op-ed titled A Thought-Provoking Conversation With a Knowledgeable Owner of AR-15s and Other ‘Scary Guns’, the gun-grabbing left cannot create enough “common sense” [gimme a break] gun laws to stop evil people from committing evil acts. Period, regardless of which mechanism they use to commit such acts.
Evil does not follow laws. It never will, Jim Acosta, including “evil” AR-15s.
Post a Comment