Successfully (and Dangerously) Tweeting for Reform

How do we know "they" were armed?  Arming one's self with a weapon of some sort is quite often a prerequisite to launching bullets through the walls of an urban dwelling, even if a slingshot or Yagua blowgun was employed for this purpose.  Perhaps you're suggesting the bullets were thrown at high speed by a former Red Sox player on steroids?  After all, anything is possible.

How do we know "they" were men?  The one thing we know is what we don't know, so perhaps the term "gunmen" should be modified to "gunperson".  Although if we apply that term, then you should inform Janet Napolitano that the one thing we know is that we don't know that only men are responsible for disasters, and she should therefore change her term replacing "terrorism" from "man-caused disaster" to "person-caused disaster" - just for consistency, which is important for the illusion of order in a completely chaotic government bureaucracy.

Making political statements with guns is not generally considered an appropriate form of behavior in "polite society" (using the term loosely of course), although I have no objection to taking a slogan like "Glenn Beck is SO Last Week", hanging it upon the target at the outdoor range, and proceeding to shoot at it (assuming one was able to purchase the bullets with which to do so).  That would seem to be an excellent use of the Second Amendment to make a First Amendment statement, whereas shooting at the Commissioner's home, or that of his neighbor, not so much.