
Originally Posted by
utimmer43
I too just got done reading this article and was about to post it here, but Iceman beat me to it.
It is so sickening (although, not surprising at all) that the entire article, except for one little paragraph at the end, focuses on the source and the gun's history. Think about that logic. How does the fact that the gun was seized from a felon years ago make that particular gun any more likely to be used in a violent crime. And isn't it curious how they only mention the Ruger's history. What about the other gun that Bedell had?