Rolling Stone Magazine, that bastion of crack journalism, has brought their investigative might to bear targeting self-defense rules.  To that end, they show the smiling 13-year-old boy.  Furthermore, they describe his killing as "reasonable" in the eyes of the NRA. 

Yes, Rolling Stone.  The same Rolling Stone that today stares down the barrel of further potentially bankrupting lawsuits.  They lost the first University of Virginia rape story defamation lawsuit in November.  More surely will follow.  Why?  Their defamatory rape story – completely and utterly fabricated – destroyed the reputations of countless good and decent men and women at the University of VA.

The Rolling Stone has gifted us another hit piece on American culture.  Their latest irresponsible fake-news writing popped onto our radar courtesy of the Moms Demand Action on the Street Corners of Everytown:

This, the Moms say, "is what happens when you let gun lobbyists write the laws".

Now that we have heard the Everytown spin on the story, let us examine the facts of the case from the perspective of the Democrat operative with a byline at The Rolling Stone:

When the NRA Calls the Shots: Inside the 'Reasonable Killing' of a 13-Year-Old Boy

A child is gunned down for stealing change from a parked car – here's what justice looks like when "stand your ground" is the law of the land

…on November 28th, 2015, Martinez [Payne-Smith] and two of his friends — Ernest Williams, 14, and another boy, who was 11 — climbed onto their bicycles and set off under a full moon from the St. Louis neighborhood of Walnut Park East, one of the most dangerous areas of a city with the highest homicide rate in the United States. Martinez, Ernest's little cousin, was then 13. He had small ears and sharp cheekbones. He liked Hot Wheels cars, Nick Cannon and The Polar Bear Express. He weighed 89 pounds. His earlier accident had not raised his threshold for pain. When he received shots at the doctor, multiple family members had to hold him down.

Like almost everyone in Walnut Park East, the three boys were African-American. They rode their bikes past rows of dilapidated, single-story structures with broken gutters and broken windows, sagging porches and peeling paint. Some homes appeared to list heavily, as if about to topple over. Others were boarded up and empty, with signs posted produced by the city that read "No Loitering."

As the night wore on, the boys reached Riverview Boulevard, a main thoroughfare where the homes are made of red brick and are in better condition than those in Walnut Park East. They pedaled into a concrete alley that ran behind the houses, softly illuminated by overhead lights.

Shortly before 12:45 a.m., the boys came upon a blue 1991 Oldsmobile sedan, parked in a carport behind a closed chain link gate, next to a white garage. The interior light had been left on, and it caught their attention. They were children with little access to spending money, and thought there might be some in the vehicle. They set down their bicycles and hopped over the gate.

…Ernest, the 14-year-old, stood watch by the driver's door while Martinez and the other boy, whose name has not been released, poked around in the car. They spotted a container in the center console. Inside were four dimes and 15 nickels.

So these boys, with little access to spending money, thought it would be okay to jump a fence and break into someone's car and steal money or other valuables that didn't belong to them.  The car's owner sees people breaking into his car and comes out his back door, gun in hand and confronts them from the porch.  The first move he sees is towards him, so he fires four shots.  One of his rounds finds the 13-year-old would-be break-in artist.  It punches his ticket.

Prosecutors agree that under Missouri law, the owner of the car fired in self-defense against a threat from a group of criminal predators.

"The layout seemed to corroborate his story," Tyson says. "All Mr. McDade knows is that he has three guys in his locked yard, breaking into his car. And the first move he sees is towards him.

"What's reasonable comes down to a calculous by us. We're not going to require a someone to be shot or shot at before he clears the hurdle of reasonable fear."

Yet this simple case of self-defense remains unbearable to the anti-gun, anti-self-defense social justice warriors at The Rolling Stone.  They don't place one iota of blame on this boy, or the child rearing of his parents – or lack thereof.  The music rag masquerading as a reputable news magazine failed to blame anyone except the NRA (the prosecutor belonged to the NRA), and gun owners.  Ironically, the homeowner who shot the boy had a felony conviction in his past.  He couldn't legally own a gun. 

This miserable excuse of a publication failed at their baseless attack on the University of Virginia over a fabricated story about rape. 

These anti-social, disinterested in justice and anything but warriors will also fail in their vile and despicable effort to protect America's criminal class.  Their baseless attack on the NRA and America's gun owners is just reason number 3,452,873 why Donald Trump won this election.