Quote Originally Posted by Mr. E View Post
What if, say, Obama or Harry Reid said that all guns needed to be outlawed and that there needed to be a 'solution' to those who promote 'second amendment solutions', then a person went out and stabbed the head of the NRA while screaming 'This is for you, Barack'? Would it then be the fault of the left that this random insane individual decided to take the message they heard, contort it, and try to make it a reality by any means necessary?
If people on the left encouraged "second amendment solutions", and told everyone to solve their problems with violence, then YES. Palin's catchcry is "don't retreat, reload"!

Re. the gun-sights map:
Back in March 2010, Sarah Palin created a campaign push through her Facebook page against Democrats from conservative districts who had voted for the health care bill -- among them, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), who was shot today.

The page used a picture of a map of the United States, with crosshair targets located over 20 districts that were carried by the McCain-Palin ticket in 2008, and whose representatives voted for the health care bill. The picture did not use photos of the members themselves, but instead placed the crosshairs over their geographic districts and included a list of their names below.

The page was promoted through Palin's Twitter account with the slogans, "Take Back the 20!" and, "Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!"
Also, the "second amendment solutions" quote is actually not Palin's, so I apologise for getting that wrong. It was actually Tea Party candidate Sharron Angle, and the exact wording was "second amendment remedies" (which, if anything, sounds worse, to me).

If, in your example, Obama and Reid and Pelosi were using this kind of language, and there was a Tea Party equivalent for the Left, then yes, I think it would be utterly fair to apportion them some blame. As with what I said about the Qu'ran: if it's explicitly in the teachings, the philosophies, the holy documents, the written, spoken and defended statements of the leaders, then I definitely think that the construct of the party/group/religion deserves a share of the blame.

I'm not acting like people don't have free will. You're acting like people's decisions are made without external input of stimuli like religious and political conviction. It is naive to imagine a neat line dividing "crazy" and "sane" when it comes to violence for that reason.