Image 01 Image 03

Shooter targeting Family Research Council wanted to “smear Chick-fil-A in their faces” after murders

Shooter targeting Family Research Council wanted to “smear Chick-fil-A in their faces” after murders

This past August, the Family Research Council, an pro-Christian values nonprofit that promotes “faith, family, and freedom in public policy,” was the target of gunman Floyd Corkins who opened fire declared in the lobby of their DC headquarters. The professor wrote about how Corkins used the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of “hate groups” in order to target the FRC, which was also singled out by the Human Rights Campaign for its  defense of traditional marriage.

Corkins had 50 rounds of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches in his backpack at the time of the shooting. Now the motive for the 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches has been revealed.

Court documents reveal that Corkins told the FBI he wanted to smear the Chick-fil-A sandwiches in the faces of his murder victims. He also told them that he wanted to “kill as many people as possible.” CNS reports:

In an interview with the FBI following the shooting, as provided in the “Statement of Offense,” Corkins said that “(1) intended to enter the FRC that day to kill as many people as possible and smother Chick-fil-A sandwiches in their faces; (2) he intended to kill the guard who confronted him in the lobby (i.e., Johnson); and (3) he had taken substantial steps in the preceding week in furtherance of carrying out the crimes.”

As you may recall, Chicago Alderman Joe Moreno declared war on Chick-fil-A after President Dan Cathy remarked that he supported traditional marriage. Moreno demonized the group, declared he wouldn’t allow them to open in his war, and then later recanted after being roundly shamed by advocates of free speech on both sides of the aisle. Moreno’s witch hunt also inspired the Chicago Occupy activist’s rant against a homeless man reading the bible outside Chick-fil-A, which I captured on video.

It may be tricky for the media to heap all the blame on Corkins’s gun, in this case.

Update — WAJ adds:

[Note – Title changed from “smother” to “smear” in order to accurately represent the court documents.]


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


“…15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches in his backpack at the time of the shooting.”

AH-HA…!!! Time for chikin sammich control legislation!!!

The left has dehumanized all opponents, making it possible to eliminate them with no moral restraints. Unborn children are blobs of tissue…a choice…not humans. Republicans are Nazis, Neanderthals, evil capitalists with no human compassion for the 99%. Religious people are the murderous, judgmental, hypocritical mobs from the Salem witch trial days or the Crusades, who deserve the karma they invited.

The left has abandoned the concepts of basic human rights and individual liberty because it has abandoned the concept that people have value because of their existence, replacing it with the concept that people have value because of their function.

Piers Morgan tweet: “The LA cop-killer murder spree has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with deranged criminality. I hope they catch him asap.”

How do you say, “Hit me with a clue bat” in British?

LukeHandCool (who, if he weren’t so consumed with civility and decorum, would love to smear Piers’s face with fish and chips with plenty of salt and vinegar)

Luke, I personally believe that if the LA murderer had spouted conservative instead of leftist rhetoric that Morgan would have said the same thing, that it wasn’t political and we should just catch the guy. I truly believe that.

Of course, I also truly believe in the Tooth Fairy.

Meanwhile, Ann is quite right that it’s hard to make this just about the gun. That’s why the legacy media isn’t saying much about it. No one on the face of the Earth–what the hell, no one in this arm of the galaxy–thinks they wouldn’t be making hay out of it if a right-wing nut had tried to attack Planned Parenthood.

    LukeHandCool in reply to Alex Bensky. | February 8, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    I’m here in L.A. and I work for LAPD, so I’m taking the proper precautions.

    I’ve armed myself with a whistle and a pair of scissors.

    Captain Obvious in reply to Alex Bensky. | February 8, 2013 at 4:33 pm

    Don’t be ridiculous. If we only had our new ban on scary-looking-but-functionally-identical weapons, there’s no way a police officer who was also in the military would ever had access to a gun of any kind….er…so there!

Let’s not forget Mayor Menino: “There’s no place for discrimination on Boston’s Freedom Trail and no place for your company alongside it”.

Where to start, right? It’s not discriminating to try to lock a company out of Boston because they (Shock!) favor traditional marriage? Does Freedom of speech have a place on Boston’s Freedom Trail?

Captain Obvious | February 8, 2013 at 3:25 pm

Actual legal question:
Could SLPC be held liable for wrongful death? I most cases that would be absurd, but consider this first: After the Jared Loughner fiasco, SLPC was very vocal about their belief that exposing persons or organizations to contempt or ridicule was a direct incitement for violence against the same. Given that SLPC has explicitly confirmed this belief, is it not then fair to assume that any action in which they exposed others to contempt or ridicule, they did so with the foreknowledge and belief (erroneous or not) that they were inciting violence? To me that would indicate malice, but correct me if I’ve missed something?

    Captain Obvious in reply to Captain Obvious. | February 8, 2013 at 4:21 pm

    Here’s an example;
    Hypothetical person Samantha Penelope Lewis-Cooper writes to her local newspaper that she knows how the mob works, and if one plants lilies on the corners of one’s lawn, this is an indicator to the mob that you want your neighbors killed. Samantha then plants lilies on the corners of her lawn. A few weeks later, her neighbors end up murdered by a mobster. The mobster admits to police: “I read Samantha’s published letter that lilies are ‘coded speech’ for soliciting a hit. Then, on a separate occasion, I saw her lilies. No, Samantha never explicitly used the words ‘Please kill my neighbors,’ but I reasonably interpreted her that way.”

    Is Samantha guilty or liable in any way for her neighbors’ deaths? Does it matter whether the mob really works that way in general or not, if Samantha believed that it did?

If I read Dorner’s screed correctly (and I’m not going back through it again) didn’t he praise Chik-Fil-A for having great chicken?

So even among psychotic killers there is disagreement on CFA.

Henry Hawkins | February 8, 2013 at 7:23 pm

Whoa, stay the anti-Piers Morgan rants! Think about it: Piers Morgan is the liberal version of a Todd Akin but with a nightly TV show from which he doles out evidence of liberal intellectual vacuousness, hypocrisy, and capacity for deceit. To a conservative, this clown’s a gold mine.


    SmokeVanThorn in reply to Henry Hawkins. | February 9, 2013 at 3:35 pm

    If we stipulate that you’re a nuanced Frum/Brooks type pragmatist, will you stop doing the useful idiot Akin bashing routine?

    I mean, that’s really what you’re after, isn’t it?

SmokeVanThorn | February 9, 2013 at 3:38 pm

What – no lectures from Dan Riehl and Eric Erickson about how we shouldn’t be “angry” and need to stop “whining” about issues like this?