Self-Labeled "Warrior for Babies" Declares Guilt, Complains about Toilets

I have had little interest in Planned Parenthood shooting suspect Robert Lewis Dear from the get-go, as it was apparent the main legal issue in his case would be his competency and mental health, while the issue for the media would be gun control.

Today in court Dear declared himself guilty, complained his lawyer (a highly respected, experienced and dedicated public defender who was one of the two main lawyers for Aurora shooter James Holmes) was out to drug him and was conspiring with Planned Parenthood, and called himself a "warrior for babies." Facing 179 criminal counts, he told the judge he wanted more charges, saying more babies had been killed that day by Planned Parenthood.

According to observers in the courtroom, he had about 20 outbursts during the hearing. I thought this one was interesting: [More...]

After slamming his experienced, highly qualified and dedicated lawyer, claiming he was in cahoots with Planned Parenthood, he asked that Amnesty International contact him. Why? He doesn't think his toilet facilities and access to water are adequate. Pretty ball-sy demand for a guy who by choice lived in the woods without plumbing or electricity. I wonder if it's hit him yet how slim his chances are for ever seeing the woods again -- or for that matter, a running stream or the stars?

Will El Paso County spend the money to try and kill Dear, as opposed to put him away for life -- either in a prison or mental health facility? I hope not. I think it would be a a waste of Colorado's money and its limited judicial and legal resources.

Prosecutors have months to make the decision. But since they filed 179 charges over the killing of 3 people and wounding of 9, maybe the DA's office is just planning on making sure Dear never goes free. Had this occurred in Colorado's death penalty capital, Arapahoe County, I doubt the DA would even consider a life sentence, even after failing to unanimously persuade a jury to sentence James Holmes to death.

Does anyone think a killer such as Dear would consider a county's record on the death penalty in choosing which county to commit his heinous crime? I doubt it. Yet some people still believe the death penalty is a deterrent to killing. As if anyone really says to himself, "I'll just maim the victim" or "I better not do this so I don't get killed for it."

< Wednesday Open Thread | Thursday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Dear is out to sea without rudder and compass. (none / 0) (#1)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 05:31:13 AM EST
    But the people who should be sharing the docket with him are the right-wing jackasses who cast aside their moral compass this past summer:

    • David Daleiden and the ideologues at the Center for Medical Progress, who deliberately manufactured that highly edited video that defamed Planned Parenthood; and

    • Those elected officials on the right who egged Daleiden on and exploited his propaganda with their own increasingly alarmist and incendiary public rhetoric about Planned Parenthood.

    They knew damned well what their flamethrowing might do to the least stable among their intolerant crowd, like Robert Dear, Jr. Yet they never once paused to consider the potential consequences of their actions, and thus all but ensured that the Colorado Springs attack became an inevitable byproduct of their manifestly irresponsible political behavior.

    While a 57-year-old nutball may have been the guy who actually pulled the trigger, suffice to say that he's not the only one here with blood on his hands.

    Words matter.

    I don't (none / 0) (#2)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 06:26:43 AM EST
    happen to think Dear was unstable. People like him are pretty common around Georgia and SC and I understand he lived in SC for a long time. Raised in a fundamentalist environment they believe that they are doing the work of God by killing people at the PP clinic. What he says about saving more babies by shooting doctors is a pretty standard belief in a lot of fundamentalist evangelical circles. That's kind of how they justify it. Same mentality the gun lobby has. It's okay to kill someone if you're scared.

    Just because people like Dear are common (none / 0) (#4)
    by CoralGables on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 09:42:20 AM EST
    doesn't mean they are stable

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 09:46:38 AM EST
    that's a different argument. Perhaps the majority of fundamentalists and/or evangelicals here are mentally unstable. My point is if Dear is mentally ill then we've got a whole lot of mentally ill people down here in GA too.

    I don't think anyone would suggest (5.00 / 5) (#10)
    by Peter G on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 11:23:35 AM EST
    that the proof of Dear's (possible) mental illness is the nature or intensity of his political, religious or social-policy beliefs. Nor should anyone suggest that if someone shares those beliefs, it would ipso facto be evidence of mental illness. Nor is it even to be presumed (I would say) that someone who acts on such beliefs in a violent or otherwise illegal way is probably mentally ill. S/he may just be a criminal or a terrorist, or both. (The incidence of mental illness among criminals and terrorists is no doubt well above average, but surely not universal.) The point is that this particular person, Dear, seems to be exhibiting signs -- subject to professional testing, including for malingering -- of possible incompetency.  As a legal category, incompetency is very different from the defense of "insanity". (Not only are the standards different, but insanity looks to the time of the crime, while incompetency is concerned with the defendant's condition at the time of the subsequent legal proceedings.) And neither of those legal categories necessarily lines up exactly with any particular medical or psychiatric diagnosis.

    Thank you for the legal information Peter (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 06:50:55 AM EST

    I can (none / 0) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 11:54:15 AM EST
    tell you here in GA the standards are very low for any type of competency or insanity. If you know what you did was wrong you are competent to stand in front of a judge here in Ga.

    I am pretty sure (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Peter G on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 12:38:41 PM EST
    that knowing [now] that "what you [allegedly] did was wrong" is not the standard for legal competency anywhere.

    Well (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:04:41 PM EST
    then my family member with schizophrenia was rooked by her lawyer. The lawyer told me that when he asked her if she knew what she did was wrong and she answered yes then she was able to be declared legally and mentally competent to face the judge.

    I certainly cannot comment on one person's case (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Peter G on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:21:29 PM EST
    Nor did I do any research on Georgia law. But if you read the links I provided, you will see that what the lawyer said (or what you remember the lawyer saying, which might be confused) is a conflation of the competency standard with an insanity standard which, as quoted, makes no sense to me.

    Well (none / 0) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:25:07 PM EST
    it didn't make a whole lot of sense to me either but it was what my family was told. It would seem in GA almost none would not meet the standards for being incompetent or mentally ill.

    No trouble agreeing with that statement! (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Peter G on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:34:15 PM EST
    In fact, I think it's true almost everywhere that almost no one meets the (far too stringent, imho) standard for competency or for insanity. Witness James Holmes, the Aurora movie theater shooter.

    And, (in)famously, Jeffrey Dahmer (none / 0) (#55)
    by Towanda on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 10:03:32 PM EST
    was (legally) sane.

    Clearly. (none / 0) (#56)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Dec 12, 2015 at 08:14:22 AM EST
    If the test is, are you able to feed yourself, (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Dec 12, 2015 at 08:15:39 AM EST
    and keep food in the fridge, he was sane.

    "With a little something preserved... (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Dec 12, 2015 at 08:53:55 AM EST
    ...and put aside for later.  Like a spider might do."

                                            - Dean Koontz


    Dear likely knew what he was doing. (none / 0) (#8)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 11:04:01 AM EST
    And judging from the court video, it's pretty apparent that he was also quite aware why he was there and what was going on, despite his numerous outbursts. That doesn't necessarily mean that he's stable. While I'm hardly a mental health professional, after seeing that fiery "Mission from God" look in his eyes, I'd say that he's certainly missing a few screws.

    Maybe in his mind he thought (none / 0) (#20)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:18:49 PM EST
    He was John Brown raiding the arsenal at Harper's Ferry..

    The Right does like to compare abortion to slavery..


    That could very well be. (none / 0) (#25)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 03:13:55 PM EST
    A former professor of mine at the University of Washington is an authority on John Brown and the Harper's Ferry raid. It's always been his contention that Brown was likely a self-righteous sociopath who first saw himself as an instrument of the Lord on this earth, and then welcomed his own martyrdom for his cause, following his arrest at Harper's Ferry and subsequent trial, conviction and execution for murder, insurrection and treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia.

    The fact that slavery itself was an abomination and crime against humanity, he told us, should not be used to excuse Brown's penchant for both encouraging and resorting to extreme violence on behalf of its abolition, a personal trait which was on bloody display at both Pottawatomie, KS and Harper's Ferry.

    Brown's own journey to socio-political radicalization likely began in 1837, when he became a self-avowed abolitionist following the assassination of the Rev. Elijah Lovejoy, a remnowned anti-slavery advocate, by a pro-slavery mob in Alton, IL.

    A well-respected businessman who had developed an expertise in the raising of sheep and production of fine wool, Brown likely went off the deep end sometime after 1846, the year he and his partner Simon Perkins relocated their wool business and their families to Springfield, MA, a politically progressive city which was also a budding hotbed of abolitionist activity, and a place where Brown soon established himself as one of the movement's more articulate and intractable proponents.

    Brown undoubtedly cut a very charismatic figure, and his influence was felt by no less than noted African-American leader Frederick Douglass, who first met Brown in 1847 following a speech he gave at Springfield's "Free Church," a black evangelical church where Brown was a parishioner.

    Having then spent the rest of that evening engrossed in deep conversation with Brown, Douglass later wrote, "From this night spent with John Brown in Springfield, Mass. 1847 while I continued to write and speak against slavery, I became all the same less hopeful for its peaceful abolition. My utterances became more and more tinged by the color of this man's strong impressions."

    Several of Brown's adult sons had moved to Kansas by then, which at the time was become engulfed in a simmering intrastate conflict between abolitionist and pro-slavery forces. Brown closed his wool business in Springfield and in 1855 joined his sons in Kansas, where he proceeded to fan the flames of abolition in that brand-new state.

    (It should be noted that Brown fathered 20 children in his lifetime -- 7 with first wife Dianthe, who had died in childbirth in 1832, and another 13 with second wife Mary Ann, whom he married the following year.)

    Alleging that pro-slavery advocates were plotting against his family, Brown impetuously decided upon mounting a pre-emptive strike of his own. Late in the evening of May 24, 1856, five of these alleged pro-slavery plotters were rousted from their homes by Brown and his sons and taken to Pottawatomie Creek, whereupon they were hacked to death with broadswords.

    That unprovoked massacre ignited the powder keg which soon became known as "Bleeding Kansas." Somewhere between 50 and 200 residents on both sides were killed, and scores more injured, in the subsequent bloodletting during the three years of attacks and retribution which followed.

    As Kansas historian Dale Watts notes, Brown and his fellow antislavery proponents in Kansas were hardly the innocent victims that their abolitionist friends back east sought to portray them as being. In many instances, Pottawatomie Creek in particular, they were clearly the antagonists and aggressors.

    Suffice to say that as a role model for the anti-abortion crowd, John Brown is probably a pretty hard act to follow.



    There were a lot of violent raids and vendettas (none / 0) (#26)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 03:42:03 PM EST
    going back and forth between "bloody Kansas" and Missouri back then..

    And as is the case today, often one man's righteous martyr is another man's violent fanatic..

    Writer James Loewen says the historical pattern right from the beginning has been that the more sympathetic a person was to Brown's cause, the less likely they were to see Brown as a violent fanatic committing an act of treason..


    I think that you and I can be ... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 06:06:03 PM EST
    ... entirely sympathetic to Brown's cause, which was after all the abolition of slavery, and yet still reject his appeals to and use of violence to gain his objectives.

    However laudable and commendable our goal might be, we undermine and devalue our own worthiness as human beings whenever we resort to willful acts of intimidation as our primary means to achieve it.

    Further, we expose ourselves as both hypocrites and blasphemers of the first order, whenever we invoke the name of the Lord as our rationale for inflicting pain and death upon others.



    An overgrowth of very angry people (none / 0) (#27)
    by christinep on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 05:03:43 PM EST
    in Mr. Dear's demographic ... examples of the intense angry, red-faced, stridently & singularly focused are not that uncommon, imo.  Rush Limbaugh has exhibited that behavior for years.

    I really wonder if the tendency to try to explain certain acts by looking for a quick category of a fruitcake, nut-ball, crazy-as-a-loon isn't a quick out?  Stereotypes of huffing & puffing bug-eyed galoots as automatically or surely non compos mentis can be tempting, but ... let's wait a bit. For now, I noted in the brief film clip of the "outbursts" in court yesterday, that he did seem quite aware of his circumstances, environs, seriousness of the matter, and timing for interjecting coherent full sentences that mimic what PP protesters are often heard to state. Fascinating. For now, my first impression is similar to yours, Ga6th.


    ... and further, that he knew exactly what he was doing at the time of his assault on the Planned Parenthood clinic. I also think he's a friggin' loon.

    Is Dear actually mentally ill? I'll leave that for the medical professionals to determine. That said, I believe that one becomes a crackpot through personal choice, by knowingly and intentionally wallowing in one's own conscientious ignorance and stupidity.

    In Dear's case, that's likely exacerbated by his clearly coarsened social skills, which has probably resulted from the many years he's spent living on the outer margins of society. He obviously knew he was being disruptive in court yesterday; he just doesn't give a damn.

    Ergo, absent any forthcoming diagnosis of mental illness by medical professionals, I believe that Mr. Dear is an anti-social nutball who's entirely conscious of his own actions, and likely further responsible for his own behavior and deeds.



    Limbaugh is as urbane as Edmund Burke (none / 0) (#45)
    by jondee on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 11:48:15 AM EST
    compared some of the other wingnut-radio clowns..

    Check out "Dr Savage" sometime..

    We have a local one here who sometimes claims to broadcast from "an undisclosed location" because, he claims, people (besides me ;-) are after him, and want to confiscate his guns.

    I kid you not.


    Watching that (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 07:11:25 AM EST
    IMO it was impossible, at least for a non professional, to make a serious judgement as to if the guy was really crazy or attempting to look completely crazy in order to justify an insanity defense.

    Personally I lean to the latter but I'm not a professional.   He certainly looked and acted crazy.  No doubt about that.

    I don't get the feeling that he's (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 11:31:45 AM EST
    legally insane as much as that he's someone with such a repellent personality - loud, abrasive, confrontational - that, combined with years of living off the grid, he hasn't even got a veneer of civility.  Could he have a personality disorder of some kind?  Sure - but that doesn't guarantee that someone is insane or incompetent.

    If you think about it, he's really just a paragon of political incorrectness, isn't he?  Is this who Ben Carson wants us to model ourselves after?  

    He's what Trump becomes if you take away his money and his fans, all the things he surrounds himself with to prove he's THE BEST, and make him live in a trailer with no electricity and no indoor plumbing.


    That's (none / 0) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 11:54:45 AM EST
    pretty much what it seems like to me from afar.

    Think about the visage & stridency (none / 0) (#28)
    by christinep on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 05:10:53 PM EST
    in the continual rants of Limbaugh and some of the further right.  What distinguishes the intensity of appearance & sound?  Maybe $$$$$. Or maybe that our society has been pummeled with that style enough to be used to it ... except when the individual is in shackles in a courtroom.

    The image & anger of the TeaPots come to mind also....

    For being such a "loner," he did seem to interact enough to have been married more than once (and, with a newer girlfriend now?)  Again, fascinating.


    What insanity defense? (none / 0) (#14)
    by sj on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 11:58:30 AM EST
    James Holmes (Aurora theatre shooting) is a diagnosed schizophrenic. Deemed competent to stand trial.

    Well, Mr. Dear is (none / 0) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 10:54:43 AM EST
    probably just using that cursed "politically correct" bathroom issue to his advantage.  Dear is, after all, a transgender leftist activist, according to a top Republican presidential contender, Ted Cruz.  

    And in any case (none / 0) (#7)
    by FlJoe on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 11:03:44 AM EST
    Prison will turn him gay, according to Carson.

    Yes, trapped inside that man's body ... (none / 0) (#9)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 11:14:21 AM EST
    ... is a woman who simply loves too much, the kind who populate so many of the offerings from the Lifetime Movie Network.

    The glib Mr. Cruz himself is a very dangerous man.


    In conservative Colorado Springs... (none / 0) (#15)
    by magster on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 12:00:38 PM EST
    ... I doubt the DA could get a jury to unanimously recommend the death penalty.

    that sounds so counterintuitive until I think (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by ruffian on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    about it...this may be the one death penalty they would not support.

    All the negative consequences to an action (none / 0) (#16)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 12:18:17 PM EST
    are deterrents, the DP is no different.

    Too bad he can't focus on the born (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 02:29:11 PM EST
    Babies, and advocate for what they need.

    Whatever, crazy is the new black.

    the difference (none / 0) (#31)
    by thomas rogan on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 09:27:00 PM EST
    What exactly is the difference between Robert Dear and that respected activist William Ayers?  I guess Ayers set bombs when people weren't around, so it would have been OK if Robert Dear had planted bombs only at night when the Planned Parenthood building was empty?  Do you get to be called an activist and not a terrorist if you are like a reverse neutron bomb, only destroying buildings but not people?

    thereis no difference (none / 0) (#33)
    by nyjets on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 05:54:05 AM EST
    They are both terrorist

    Of course (none / 0) (#36)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 09:07:52 AM EST
    they are both terrorists, but terrorists come in all shapes and sizes. They were/are criminals.

    What's the difference between Andrew Joseph Stack
    and Mohamed Atta? What's the difference between ISIS and The KKK?

    Terrorists all, criminals all, but the differences are stark.


    When I saw thomas' comment, my (none / 0) (#37)
    by Anne on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 09:14:22 AM EST
    first reaction was that it was posted in order to get some sh!t stirred up; I imagine he's a little disappointed that no one took the bait.

    Of Course it Was... (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 09:45:32 AM EST
    ....standard operating procedure, after a horrific right wing nut kills people, they got dig up someone from the left, even if it means going back nearly 5 decades.

    I got a better Idea, how about we list all the derange right wingers that killed people in those 50 years.

    I'll start in the Ayers era, with James Earl Ray.


    Of course there is a TIME difference (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 10:18:11 AM EST
    between the KKK and ISIS and the other radical islamists.

    The KKK is marginalized and any terrible thing they might do is condemned by the surrounding society that they come from and they are prosecuted by the state.

    When you try and compare the actions of the radical islamists you are just like the nut cases on the right who excuse Drear.


    The KKK was absorbed and melded (5.00 / 4) (#42)
    by jondee on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 10:38:55 AM EST
    into the conservative movement as much as they were (theoretically) marginalized..

    Just google Obama + the n-word..

    And if you end up at Tall Cotton, pay no attention to the African witch doctor..


    Sorry (none / 0) (#44)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 11:07:36 AM EST
    Jim, terrorism is timeless.

    And this makes no sense whatsoever.

    When you try and compare the actions of the radical islamists you are just like the nut cases on the right who excuse Drear.
    All acts violent extremism can and should be both compared and contrasted.

    Really (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 05:13:33 PM EST
    We should be talking about the Romans feeding Christians to the lions??

    Then there was Pol Pot who killed millions...and Stalin and Hitler and Mohammed himself.

    You are avoiding facing up to what concerns us today is what concerns us today.

    When you want to talk about the Crusades as justification for ISIS you just lose whatever credibility you had.

    Drear is a nut. The legal system should figure out what to do with him and then do it. I'm a LWOP person myself but if CO wants to execute him I won't cry.


    Yes (none / 0) (#48)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 06:09:30 PM EST
    Crucifixion, lynchings and suicide bombings are all forms of terrorism, if you want to understand any of it you must study all of it. Only fools ignore history.

    Violent extremism is as old as humanity itself, with the same old justifications of God and/or Country repeated over and over again.

    You and the rest of of the panic mongers always conveniently erase history trying to insinuate ISIS is some kind of unique threat, never encountered by civilization before.

    The Crusades are history Jim, they were not justified by preceding events, and they are not justification for any succeeding events, certainly not ISIS, but they are all different iterations of  
    the rough beast slouching towards Bethlehem.

    If you don't understand that you don't understand humanity, if you don't understand that you can't begin to fight it.



    And only a fool looks at their navel (none / 0) (#49)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 06:28:03 PM EST
    agonizing over things that happened years and years ago. When you say that terrorism by radical islamists is justified by Christians opposing what Muslims had done, and that is exactly what too many on the Left do.

    They look for a reason to excuse terrorism. It is just another expression of "America bad."

    Here's a great example of how dumb this makes some students in our "use to be" great universities,



    You are the expert (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 07:32:47 PM EST
    On navel aviation.

    There is no doubt that there are many (none / 0) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 08:56:10 PM EST
    things about which I know more about than you.

    Aviation would be one of them.

    Now, post something about something serious.

    You know....some TV series you are enamored of.


    Robert Ayers (none / 0) (#34)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 06:30:20 AM EST
    Gets to launch political careers of Chicago politicians

    Look, just because Ayers and Obama (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 10:20:44 AM EST
    hung out together, served on etc., etc., that doesn't mean Obama knew him.

    Actually Obama was wandering by and Ayers just decided to help him.

    Simple as that.

    Happens all the time.


    Now that you've underscored (none / 0) (#41)
    by jondee on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 10:33:57 AM EST
    how closely connected Obama and Ayers are, nobody here will ever vote Domocrat again.

    So you are now claiming that (none / 0) (#50)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 06:29:23 PM EST
    Ayers isn't a hero of many Demos?




    I really (5.00 / 4) (#51)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 06:39:37 PM EST
    never heard anybody refer to him as a hero except you right now. Your straw harvest must have been good this week.

    The more you obsess about the evileeee (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by jondee on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 08:20:52 PM EST
    Bill Ayers, the more I suspect there must be something marvelous about him that I missed before.



    inspired title for this post, Jeralyn (none / 0) (#32)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 02:34:07 AM EST
    worthy of The Onion   : )

    The more a person's actions (none / 0) (#43)
    by jondee on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 10:41:57 AM EST
    anger and upset us, the more likely we are to jump to the conclusion that they're "responsible for their actions", no?

    what? (none / 0) (#46)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Dec 11, 2015 at 01:32:58 PM EST
    i think it's a funny title

    it made me laugh

    full stop

    you seem to be reading sonething else into what i said

    i have far less interest than many here in Duck Dynasty Meets Baby Parts, though it's sad that people died because of another armed lunatic on the loose