Erick Erickson did not care for the New York Times’ front-page editorial last week, so …

This is what I think of the New York Times editorial today. The United States suffered its worst terrorist attacks since September 11 and the New York Times’ response is that all law-abiding citizens need their guns taken away. Screw them. The New York Times wants you to be sitting ducks for a bunch of arms jihadists who the New York Times thinks no doubt got that way because of the United States.

It should be striking to every American citizen that the New York Times believes the nation should have unfettered abortion rights, a right not made explicit in the Constitution, but can have the Second Amendment right curtailed at will though it is explicitly in the Constitution.

Again, we have suffered the worst terrorist attack in more than a decade and the New York Times believes now we must have our rights taken away as a response to terrorism.

I hope everyone will join me in posting pictures of bullet holes in the New York Times editorial. Send them your response. …

By the way, it is worth noting that all my shooting friends are upset that I did not keep a small cluster. But I wanted to shoot it from top to bottom. I only had seven bullets and made the most of it.

As you can imagine, Erickson got responses, to which he wrote …

Well the last eighteen hours or so has been interesting. Hollywood actors to “journalists” have been outraged that I dared put bullet holes in the front page editorial of the New York Times. I’ve been denounced as a psycho, called angry, and told that this action is further proof we need gun control.

All I did was put seven bullet holes in a New York Times editorial from top to bottom. I guess I should again point out that I wasn’t going for a grouping, but top to bottom coverage.

In any event, the left seems more outraged by me putting bullet holes in a newspaper than they are terrorists shooting up a place in California. They are positively enraged by it. Had I put a statue of Jesus in a jar of urine or burned an American flag, they’d call it free speech and art. But this — this was an atrocity. It is as if I shot a person.

The hilariousness of this has been on display for the last few days.

When I pointed out the other day that we haven’t had these sorts of shootings before the Age of Obama, the left flew into outrage mode.

According to the left, we actually have had fewer shootings in the Age of Obama.

Well then, I pondered, why do we need more gun control if these shootings are already on the decline?

That just flew them into further rage and name calling.

It really is a cult like experience to see a group of people see a terrorist attack and their solution after it is the same as before it — gun control. The left has closed itself off to any ideas, but those in their own echo chamber now. Gun control and carbon taxes will solve all the world’s problems.

… following up with:

The ensuing reaction over these past twenty-four hours have convinced me I must apologize. My conscience convicts me that I made a major error.

In all honesty, had I known that these last twenty-four hours would be as hysterically funny as they have been, I would have shot the front page of the New York Times well before today.

These people are insane, filled with rage, and flat out funny. Suggesting that shooting the front page of the New York Times is the equivalent of ISIS destroying Palmyra and killing its citizens has to be the icing on the cake. That the Catholic Democrats twitter account is the one that suggested it makes it even better.

Then there are the truthers. When not holding on to the idea that George W. Bush brought down the World Trade Center, they’re certain I stabbed the New York Times with a pencil because they see what looks like lead on it.

I have not gotten this good a laugh out of the left since they all melted down after I called Wendy Davis “Abortion Barbie.”

I am so sorry. Had I known this would have happened, I would have done it a whole lot sooner.