GOP in Giffords’ district holds raffle for Glock

And why is that? Isn't it important to reinforce the idea that regardless of the fact that a gun was used to shoot a member of Congress the right to keep and bear arms remains one of our most precious and important rights - one that even the victim of the shooting herself continues to support and defend? This politically correct nonsense has simply got to stop. The GOP shouldn't repeat a popular fundraising event because some people might find it a bit insensitive? Oh puuhhleeeeeze - get a life already.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Glock also one of the most-common market guns due to the use by law enforcement, not to mention the price difference? In all fairness, if the gun that was used in the attack was a 1900's rifle, I can guarantee you it wouldn't be what was being auctioned. This incident is coincidental, it is not related directly through cause.

RCCL, I think you're right, Glock has been a top seller for years.
Also did a Google search on rawstory, listed as (surprise, surprise) a progressive news and political site. Wayne maybe check your sources if you want anyone to take these any more serious than a VL posting.

Wily Fox aka Angela wrote: you can't make this stuff up....

Yes...How tasteful.... (and predictable...)

Just like the comments of the parrot of the Left. :Snooze

Thank you HEARTLESS, I'm glad to hear that there are a few more out there who think this may just be coincidence. Now, as to the auction itself as it relates to what happened:

My feelings on this are mixed. I don't necessarily have a problem with it, but I can see why others would, if that makes sense. By the same token, however, people are murdered everyday, all over the world, from gun violence, when is it okay, then, to raffle a gun? Just as after 9/11, movie studios began pulling and holding movies with plane danger-scenrios for a few months, I'm not sure what, save for what some consider prudence, makes us feel like we should dictate to one another what seems appropriate when it comes to our decisions. Would I choose, as an example, to have a gun-raffle inside the IHOP that had violence erupt in it this week? Well... I can't say that I would, but I can't say I would find it distasteful if someone else did.

Violence, and violent events, like what we're talking about here, are commonplace, much more commonplace than we'd like to admit, and so we consider ourselves offended, we ask others to consider their actions out of our own perceptions of 'respect' as it relates to each tragedy that unfolds. What is disrespectful to some, ruffles no feathers in either direction for others. As a counter-point, you could argue that this raffle might help. In fact, having someone else there with the means to defend those who were harmed may have been beneficial, perhaps they should call it a Safety-Mechanism Raffle, or maybe perhaps we're all just a little too uptight when it comes to correlating events and tragedies?

I'm not of one opinion or another, but I don't see the "outrage" that this is causing, I'm not mad about it, nor do I think it is in direct reaction to what happened, and if it's not, where is the offense? Can someone please explain this to me?

I don't see a thing wrong with the raffle.

Thousands of people are killed and injured every year by automobiles. We don't seem to have a problem recognizing that it isn't really the fault of the automobile, it is the fault of the loose nut behind the wheel.

Why can't we recognize the same thing regarding guns?