Sarah Huckaby: "A Motive Has Yet To Be Determined." 'Motive' Isn't The Real Question.

(Yes, I actually TIMED how long it would take her to say "our thoughts and prayers." If you're curious...10 seconds from the time she started answering the question.)

But THIS was the most ridiculous statement...."A motive has yet to be determined."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=95&v=m7NUzsyoJMM


NUTCASES don't HAVE motives. They might have rationalizations, but why should we care what they are? Yes, he's a nutcase. The only type of person who'd murder dozens of people he's never met before is a nutcase, and that INCLUDES radicalized, lone wolf terrorists. The rationalization for doing it may differ, but anybody who'd actually do it is a mentally unbalanced psychopath.

It's very simple:

To 'liberals,' the issue is: "WHY is it so easy for nutcases to get stockpiles of assault weapons?"

To 'conservatives,' the issue (apparently) is: "everybody should be allowed to get stockpiles of assault weapons, including nutcases, but what was THIS particular nutcases 'motive?'"

As if that makes any difference to the people who were killed. In truth, the only thing the gun-nuts want to know is A) Were they purchased legally, and B) Was he a LEFT winger, like the loser who shot Steve Scalise. If they were purchased legally, they can say 'look, the gun laws that already exist didn't stop this, so why do we need more?' And if it was a left winger they can say "look, both sides do it." When, in reality, only ONE 'side' does it. Nutcases. What's at issue is, why should it be so easy for both nutcases AND sane people to get stockpiles of lethal assault weapons that are easily converted to fully automatic?