Was Dear gunning for Planned Parenthood?

I cannot imagine what would be more hypocritical than a person who is opposed to killing babies in the womb but would kill people who abort babies. Yet, there are some people on the far right fringes that might go so far as to commit murder. Not many people, but some. We call those people mentally ill.

In spite of the sadness and anger felt on both sides of the political aisle over the senseless killing of three people on Saturday in Colorado Springs, there will be some liberals who are going to use a very wide brush to paint all conservatives as crazies, and will feel satisfied in their self-righteous indignation and false moral superiority over those of us who oppose abortion.

Vicki Cowart, the CEO of the Colorado Planned Parenthood clinic is claiming that the shooter, Robert Dear, held anti-abortion views. "We are learning that eyewitnesses confirm that the man who will be charged with the tragic and senseless shooting that resulted in the deaths of three people and injuries to nine others at Planned Parenthood's health center in Colorado Springs was motivated by opposition to safe and legal abortion."

Cowart calls the Planned Parenthood (PP) clinic a "health center" because she may be motivated to paint the abortion clinic in a better light--just a guess, not a fact. And to say he was "motivated by opposition to safe and legal abortion" gives Robert Dear credit for brain cells he doesn't possess.

It makes sense to question the validity of the claim that Dear was a champion of the conceived but yet unborn. He might be, but I don't trust the claim at this time. His thinking, I suspect, was influenced by the latest media videos showing PP selling baby parts. He spoke to that after he was arrested. 

There's an interesting article about Dear in American Thinker. It may shed some light on who he is.

However, if Dear killed people to stop them from killing people, then it is highly probable he is mentally ill and does not represent those of us who are pro-life. 

Cowart said, "This is an appalling act of violence targeting access to health care and terrorizing skilled and dedicated health care professionals." 

Of course it's an appalling act of violence. But to say it targeted access to health care is to stretch the definition of health beyond its meaning. Just ask the babies. Oh wait, you can't--they're dead. 

Another question is whether Dear actually targeted the "health care professionals" or the access to the abortion clinic. (See, when you call it by its major reason for existence it sounds different than the way PP would want you to hear it.) 

A law enforcement official told the Associated Press that Dear made a "no more baby parts" remark following his arrest, so yes, this gives credence to the claim that he was targeting PP. The official could not be identified due to the fact that this is an ongoing investigation--therefore, we too should be slow to judge the motivation of this deranged man.

I am in no way defending Robert Dear. He is crazy, dangerous and does not in any way, shape or form represent pro-life conservatives. I am extremely sorry for the loss of life. It's just that the soundbites of politics seems to be making an appearance. 

And just because Dear is apparently mentally ill does not change my beliefs concerning abortion and gun control issues, but normal people write about them or protest about them, they don't kill about them.

Even U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch has politicized the incident saying that the Friday attack was a crime against women receiving health care services. (Not from the baby's perspective.) It is not the job of the AG to make political statements, but trying to stop a liberal from doing that is like getting a liberal president to stop a BP Gulf Coast oil spill.

Finally, people who knew Dear said he never spoke about religion or abortion, and he had few religious or political leanings. Perhaps if he had positive religious views, he would have seen his actions in a different light.

In any case, Robert Dear does not represent conservatives or any normal person.



Tweet

Robert L. Dear, the Colorado shooter, and what we know

Now we know more about Robert L. Dear, the gunman who fired upon a Planned Parenthood (PP) clinic on Friday, killing Garrett Swasey, a six-year veteran officer at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, and two civilians. Nine others were also injured in the shootings.

Dear has a long criminal history, having been accused of domestic abuse by his wife in 1997, when they lived in Walterboro, S.C.  There is also a peeping tom charge and one for animal cruelty. Obviously, Dear, 57, is a very disturbed individual.

Dear's arrest followed a standoff with police that lasted over five hours after he began firing near a PP clinic. The charges he now faces will make the others look like jay walking offenses by comparison.

Not allowing a tragedy to go to waste, liberals, including the "Divider in Chief" are jumping on the anti-gun bandwagon and the abortion issue. The first issue is understandable, but if PP isn't merely in the business to provide abortions, why are liberals in a huff over the shooting? It probably had nothing to do with Dear being upset about PP killing babies--in fact, he doesn't seem the type. 

There is, however, clear evidence that we need to look deeper into the issues of gun laws and gun control.

If Colorado gun laws were Constitutionally in sync and civilians were able to carry (concealed or open), there might be three people alive today and Dear would have been stopped or have been smart enough not to have started in the first place. We will never know.

"We have to do something about the easy accessibility of weapons of war on our streets to people who have no business wielding them," Obama said in a statement.

You simply cannot get more dramatic than calling long rifles "weapons of war." Obama wouldn't know war unless it actually involved the White House. Bows and arrows, stones and fire were weapons of war too. 

The problem isn't the instruments that can kill--that can be almost anything--the problem is our ability to monitor those who would have "weapons of war."

Dear is probably as nutty as an MSNBC anchor. People who know him say he is mostly a loner but when he spoke, he rambled on nonsensically and avoided making eye-contact. Although liberals tend to do the same, it appears that Dear is substantially crazier and should have not been able to exercise his Second Amendment rights.

One neighbor, James Russell, told the AP that he didn't recall Dear ever talking about religion or abortion, so the PP involvement may have been serendipitous talking points for liberals.

Obviously, there will be more to learn about Dear in the near future.

Regarding the criminal charges that we know of from Dear's past, the June 1997 domestic abuse charge came when his wife claimed he pushed her out of a window, and though she didn't press formal charges, she wanted it on the record.

In June 2002, he was seen by husband and wife neighbors lurking in their bushes outside their home and Dear was arrested on the peeping tom charge. He followed up by allegedly making "unwanted advancements" toward his neighbor but those charges were dropped.

In Nov. 2002 a neighbor alleged that Dear shot his dog with a pellet gun. And though Dear denied the shooting, the genius then told police that his neighbor "was lucky that it was only a pellet that hit the dog and not a bigger round."

In Sept. 2004, the same neighbor reported to police that Dear phoned him and accused him of knocking over his motorcycle and then threatened him with bodily harm.

Dear eventually moved to Swannanoa, N.C. and was charged in two other incidents, one in 2007 the other in 2011, but the police records do not specify details of those charges.

Anyone crazier than a liberal should not be allowed to own a weapon of any kind.


Tweet