Another nut with a gun . . . sigh
hiram alejandro rodriguez briceño | Wikimedia Commons
It’s a damn shame that we cannot, no way, no how, try to assess the mental health of gun owners and users. Because we have yet another tragedy on our hands, one involving a nut with a gun who shot up an elementary school in Connecticut, and who has killed more than two dozen innocent people, at least 18 of them children.
(Cue the cry from the gunners that I am exploiting this horrific tragedy. One must not speak of nuts-with-guns tragedies, lest one be accused of exploiting them. It would be better off to ignore them).
Columbine, Colo. Blacksburg, Va. Fort Hood, Texas. Appomattox, Va. Tuscon, Ariz. Aurora, Colo. Portland, Ore.
Now, we have Newton, Conn. And there are others — each one featured a deranged individual with a gun or guns who was intent on mass slaughter.
The gunners’ only answer — it’s one that they themselves practice daily — is to arm themselves to the teeth.
There has to be a better way, though.
December 14, 2012 - 1:03 PM
Time for the adults to have a conversation about guns and gun violence. Any objections?
“The gunners’ only answer — it’s one that they themselves practice daily — is to arm themselves to the teeth.”
Seriously? I’m still trying not to throw up as I watch this and you’re throwing out this kind of crap? I’m not talking about discussing the issue, that’s fine, I’m talking about lying about those who disagree with you.
Sadly, before they have sufficient information, both sides will start throwing out nonsensical, impractical, and ineffective “solutions”.
Supposedly the rest of the world is intimidated into not “invading” the US because they know we’re all armed to the teeth! We’re scary!
The only people who should be scared by the number of guns loose in this country is us. We’re killing ourselves off at a rate that only the terrorists would envy.
Cue the cry from the gunners that I am exploiting this horrific tragedy. One must not speak of nuts-with-guns tragedies, lest one be accused of exploiting them. It would be better off to ignore them.
comment by Dan
Dan, I think you misunderstand the nuances of this.
When the gun absolutists like the VCDL are lobbying to give violence an easier path, there can certainly be discussion of gun statutes regardless of whatever tragedies are in the news. That’s called the gun lobby exception, ( it’s similar to the gun show exception, in which all gun show buyers are presumed to be honorable defenders of liberty).
Blame the gun again…not the idiot
While the rest of us pray for the families.
I can’t wait to hear your regular crew of “necessary” gun carriers to tell us how how the Principal could have stopped this if he had only been packing. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. It’s the user of the “tool” not the “tool”. Blah blah blah. What a sick and selfish mentality.
Another very sad day for all of us. (Regardless of which side of the gun issue we fall on.) Not only have the lives of (at least) 18 children been stolen from them….the childhoods of ALL the children at that school (and many others, I’m sure) have also been destroyed.
When is someone going to look into common factors among these 20-24 year old men…I swear we are looking at a long term effect of some medication or other (likely for ADD and ADHD). Something is very broken.
My heart aches for the families of the victims. It gave me chiils reading the story of the shooting, thinking what if that happened at my grandchildrens school.
Arguing with pro-gun people is useless. It’s a lost cause and I won’t waste my time doing it.
But guns do not kill. Ask the parent’s of these innocent children
The list can go on and on… Northern Illinois University….
Incomprehensible.
“Local news outlets report that the shooting occurred inside a kindergarten classroom, and that all the pupils in that classroom are unaccounted for.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/14/police-respond-to-shooting-at-connecticut-elementary-school/#ixzz2F3NMEpBM
@5. …sigh. No gun? He’s still an idiot and 18 children get to unwrap presents 11 days hence. Where in hell is your heart? If we do not have a national conversation about gun violence now, when will we? And yes, there MUST be a conversation.
It will be interesting to learn what if any medications the shooter
was under the influence of.
Horrible simply horrible.
Miriam-
The FBI put out a study on mass-shooters and could find no useable profile. About the only thing that we can say for sure is that a broken human being has inflicted unthinkable horror upon hundreds of lives.
We don’t know if this person had:
*A criminal record or history of violence
*A history of mental illness
*Abused drugs
…nothing. I was going to propose that it was obviously someone who fell through what little social safety nets our society has, but I realized that even that might not be true.
We need to lock away these dangerous nuts. But we won’t. We’ll just blame the gun used by the nut. Ironically, the children became safe when more guns came into the building.
It used to be that, every time we had a mass shooting, I’d think “Well this is it…this is the one that will turn things around. We’ll stop being held hostage to the NRA and turn the 2nd amendment into something other than a suicide pact”. I don’t even bother thinking that anymore.
Dan loses the paper another subscriber
geez how does anyone get out of the gun shows alive if guns kill….get a grip people, it ‘s the person not hte weapon, he would’ve found any other weapon to do his murdering…kind of like if you want to kill your unborn child you will find a way…murder is murder
“Dan loses the paper another subscriber.”
. . .Said the new guy reading Dan’s blog and posting comments to it on roanoke.com!
At what point does our right to bear arms begin to curtail the rights of our fellow human beings simply to live? I’d like an answer from all the NRA supporters and gun advocates out there.
Ironically, the children became safe when more guns came into the building.
Comment by Henry — December 14, 2012 @ 2:03 pm
I’m sure the parents/families of those who were killed or wounded appreciate the irony too Henry.
You ban guns, this stuff gets worse because the black market skyrockets.
You already see more ‘illegal’ gun owners because of the background checks. If we ban ALL guns, or make you go through a mental evaluation before you get one, then the black market skyrockets even more.
Who are these mentals who do this stuff? Usually fatherless or have parents who have CHECKED out. Check all of these murderers’ background. No love, nurturing, etc from their family or a tragedy within the family. That is the underlying problem that needs fixing. Parents who are INVOLVED and do their job.
Examples: Prohibition, Illegal Drugs.
[Without a gun]“. . . he would’ve found any other weapon to do his murdering…. .”
==Comment by pammala
We have finally entered the realm of maximum absurdity.
Tell us, pammala, how would this shooter have killed them without a gun? Would he have got them one by one, with a hat pin through the ear? Would he have smuggled a bomb into the school disguised within a Spiderman lunch box, and blown the whole place up?
Tell us, pammala, how would this shooter have killed them without a gun? Would he have got them one by one, with a hat pin through the ear? Would he have smuggled a bomb into the school disguised within a Spiderman lunch box, and blown the whole place up?
Comment by Dan Casey — December 14, 2012 @ 2:22 pm
Dan, Maybe you should check out the reports concerning a school in China…man was armed with a knife. Duh!
Dan-
I’m not agreeing with pammala, but the worst mass killing in a school in U.S. history was done with explosives. Wolf Blitzer is already saying this is the worst mass killing ever in a school, but it’s not going to be unless the toll rises a lot higher than anyone has reported. Worst mass shooting, probably.
Found what is likely the guy’s Facebook page. Nothing unusual at all. No pictures posing with a gun, nothing odd.
Largest school mass murder in the US
was done with a bomb….in Connecticut oddly enough.
The gun advocates answer is to abody. I’m sure those 18 dead kindergartners would have been much safer if they were all packing. We hear much from the gun lobbyists about “gun free zonws”. It is toime for America to become a gun free zone. Enough is enough.
Really, Leon? The school in China was no one was killed? Duh yourself.
The shooter was found dead and every indication is that he killed himself. THe students were exactly as safe before “more guns came into the building” as they were before. He was already dead.
pp, do you ever wonder even for a second why the rest of the world doesn’t struggle with this like we do? All of your predictions about what would happen if we ban guns, even – god forbid – try and ascertain the sanity of the gun buyer, don’t come to pass anywhere else. Wonder why.
@Jason, thanks for the info. I just really can’t wrap my head around why this seems to be becoming a trend. I don’t care if someone wants to kill themselves, it is their right to do so (even though I think it’s usually stupid and short-sighted), but this whole new wave of taking a ton of innocent people with you is just so pathetic and heart-breaking.
…and I’m wrong. This likely won’t get to the Virginia Tech number. Gonna go get my son up from his nap and hug him until he can’t stand it.
Not sure what happened there. My post should say ‘The gun advocates answer is to arm everybody”.
thanks Leon, danny doesnt think too clearly and doesnt see that there can be other ways to harm people..but then, he IS a liberal…per danny ONLY guns kill people
Prayers to the victims and their families. A evil person that is willing to die can do a huge amount of horrific damage to his fellow man. The very sad reality, is there is not much that can be done to stop this level of evil on humanity. There are many “instruments” a sick bastard like that can use, including guns.
bombs HAVE been smuggled, can you say C O L U M B I N E
Blame the gun again…not the idiot
While the rest of us pray for the families.
-pistol pete
pp, the thing is that a gun is an extension of the idiot. Without the gun, the idiot has to revert to sticks, stones, and pointy objects. I can out run an idiot with a stick any day. An idiot with a gun… not so much. We can fantasize about making guns illegal, or making all guns legal all we want. Talking doesn’t solve anything in this country anymore.
We humans are a destructive creature, we will always needlessly and senselessly kill other living things all over the planet. I agree that parenting does play a role, but that is not the whole issue.
One more thing, praying away gun violence will work if we start eating everyday at McDonald’s to EAT AWAY OBESITY… Quit meditating, get off your priest candy and do something about the problem!
Dan, Maybe you should check out the reports concerning a school in China…man was armed with a knife. Duh!
Comment by Leon — December 14, 2012 @ 2:24 pm
Holy Crap, Dan! Romney, even figured a way to outsource our violence to China! Thanks for the info, Leon! pammala is right, murder is murder. (For some reason I get the feeling pammala’s ancestors were the ones handing out blankets to Native Americans)
You know what I get tired of? All of you are more concerned with who is right and who is wrong over the damn gun issues. Y’all go ahead and kick this can down the road again.
Tell us, pammala, how would this shooter have killed them without a gun? Would he have got them one by one, with a hat pin through the ear? Would he have smuggled a bomb into the school disguised within a Spiderman lunch box, and blown the whole place up?
Comment by Dan Casey — December 14, 2012 @ 2:22 pm
Dan,
He wouldn’t have had to sneak anything in. I’m betting all the materials needed to build a shrapnel bomb can be found right now inside the school. I’m betting I can go to YOUR house and find the materials right now to build one. Perhaps you should be arrested under the Patriot Act, taken to Cuba, and tortured until you and the the rest of the gun hating liberals finally figure out these people will find another way to kill. Cain killed Able with out a gun. The Romans ruled a huge empire with out guns and these people will find a way to kill with out them.
It’s not about the guns. We’ve turned our back on God and we are reaping the consequences. It will only get worse:
“Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains. Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.” – Matt 24 (Jesus talking about the end times.)
@Dan 2:22 pm “Would he have smuggled a bomb into the school…”
Yeah, that sort of thing is just flat out impossible.
http://articles.wdbj7.com/2012-11-29/bomb-threat_35467511
Anyhow, all of these incidents serve to increase my understanding of parents who home school. My daughter is in middle school, my worst nightmare is such a tragedy taking place where she is. Screw guns, I’d just be happy if teachers were allowed to keep tasers or something. Anything would be better than cowering in the corner of a classroom, just hoping like hell that the crazy guy didn’t pick your room to attack next, or that the police find you before he does.
The God who allows 18 kindergarten kids to be massacred in order to punish his people is not the God I want to be associated with.
“We humans are a destructive creature, we will always needlessly and senselessly kill other living things all over the planet. I agree that parenting does play a role, but that is not the whole issue.”
1) …All the more reason we all need a Savior.
2) #41 – Amen!
Send a sign to Gov’t officials everywhere that they can do more to stop this insanity and slaugher of innocent people and the children…..If you like this please share and send to out of state friends and family….Display your flag upside down…we greive for all….and need help
Nice job Paddy. You just insured that none of the normal pro or anti-gun person in this thread will be the one to say the most idiotic, insulting, and downright evil thing. Your belief is sick.
The gunman most likely killed himself when he was no longer the only person in the school with a gun. That’s what happened at Virginia Tech. The gunman killed himself when he was finally confronted with another gun.
He killed his brother and mother. Why aren’t we focused on the motive?
I’m not unhappy the shooter is dead but some insight into his thought processes would have been interesting. He’d already killed family members elsewhere before getting to the school and had to drive from out-of-state to get there…this wasn’t some spontaneous snapping. Surely there were some sort of signs things were amiss with thus guy.
2597: Number of traffic fatalities in the US in December 2010.
Is your automobile a weapon?
Apparently so.
Ban automobiles now.
I am beginning to believe public school is an unsafe enviroment for
children.
Home school may be the way of the future.
Dave @3:11 p.m.
Dave, I could not agree more. WTF.
Violent begets violence….the more of these shootings there is there is going to be some crazed person who will want to out do the last one….When I went to see Lincoln, I started imagining what to do if someone started shooting. When I was at the Mall, I looked for exists and wondered, “What would I do”…Is this to become our routine thought now every time we go out? What a hell of a price to pay for a “Free” society. Do I really want to go to the Christmas Parade tonight or be in a crowed downtown arena?..
I just got on here and have not read everything, but please no one say it is “too early” to have this discussion. It never too early or late to have this discussion.
Why wasn’t the school watching who came in and out, and why was it so easy for him to get in unnoticed…isn’t that security’s job?
“Why wasn’t the school watching who came in and out, and why was it so easy for him to get in unnoticed…isn’t that security’s job?”
THERE we go! Blame the victims!
“All the more reason we all need a Savior”
Lets hope the deranged killer gave his life to Christ before he died so he doesn’t burn in the eternal torment of hell.
sarcasm/off….
If there were any supernatural intervention to be had, I would hope for a God who might occasionally intervene in preventing such evil before it actually happens, but if we can’t get a deity or his only begotten son to intervene in the genocides of the last century or so, what hope do we have for a classroom full of kindergarten kids?
I dunno. Chances are this guy bought the gun legally and by all accounts seemed sane when he made the purchase. If had any history of mental illness, he should never have been able to legally purchase one.
Not a good day.
worst mass killing in a school in U.S. history was done with explosives.
comment by Jason
So Jason, do you favor loosening restrictions on explosives, which have every bit as much definiton as “arms” under the 2A? Explain your answer in the context of favoring losening some 2A arms, like guns, but not others, and we’ll see if you’re consistent.
loosening
tragic.
as society has “evolved” over the past 30+ years, so has the “entertainment” industry.
has anyone cared to watch what our kids “played” with concerning video “games” back then, or what our grand kids have available to “play” with now? in case you haven’t noticed, “pong” has evolved to “wanton blood, guts, gore, and more”.
the family fabic has ripped wide open. churches have largely lost any luster they once had.
and, these days, no one is responsible for their actions. it’s the “road’s” fault, not the fault of an adolescent driver of a killing machine…, otherwise known as a “car”, when in the hands of a responsible person.
for blame, i look to society’s evolement. with the good, comes the bad.
53.I just got on here and have not read everything, but please no one say it is “too early” to have this discussion
comment by scott whitaker
scott, when those who favor making gun violence easier say “it’s too soon”, it’s not about sincere sadness, because they could say that much more often than they do, given the constant stream of tragedies. It’s about subtly telling their own fellow gun absolutists, by inference, that others who differ from their views are heartless. Cynical demonization of the debate opponent, in other words.
hey dave…
yep, it’s God’s fault. you’re on it, man.
sheesh.
VCDL recruiter John Wilburn is best suited to explain today’s killing of children in terms of the “victim pool” he so often mentions. Okay, John, explain away…
“Why wasn’t the school watching who came in and out, and why was it so easy for him to get in unnoticed…isn’t that security’s job?”
They are reporting the shooter was the son of one of the teachers so surely the people in the office probably knew who he was.
How many elementary schools in the suburbs do you know of that have “security”?
@Rob Thommins-
Schools are still very safe. Far more kids die at the hands of their own loved ones or by accident in their own homes.
pammala-
There was a report about a letter sent out by the principal early this year that detailed a remarkably elaborate security system, at least for elementary schools. All exterior doors were kept locked, and you had to ring a doorbell whereupon you were checked for ID via remote camera. Since this guy went after his mother, I’m guessing he got in simply because they knew him and had no reason to fear him.
Count up the number of times a post by a gun apologist implies that those on other sides of the debate want an unrealistic total gun ban, then count up the number of posts by others that actually suggest such an all or nothing approach, and you’ll see that reactionary thinking is flourishing among gun apologists.
Such a senseless tragedy. Prayers for the victims and their families.
http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poem/238616
In the Loop
by Bob Hicok
I heard from people after the shootings. People
I knew well or barely or not at all. Largely
the same message: how horrible it was, how little
there was to say about how horrible it was.
People wrote, called, mostly e-mailed
because they know I teach at Virginia Tech,
to say, there’s nothing to say. Eventually
I answered these messages: there’s nothing
to say back except of course there’s nothing
to say, thank you for your willingness
to say it. Because this was about nothing.
A boy who felt that he was nothing,
who erased and entered that erasure, and guns
that are good for nothing, and talk of guns
that is good for nothing, and spring
that is good for flowers, and Jesus for some,
and scotch for others, and “and” for me
in this poem, “and” that is good
for sewing the minutes together, which otherwise
go about going away, bereft of us and us
of them. Like a scarf left on a train and nothing
like a scarf left on a train. As if the train,
empty of everything but a scarf, still opens
its doors at every stop, because this
is what a train does, this is what a man does
with his hand on a lever, because otherwise,
why the lever, why the hand, and then it was over,
and then it had just begun.
Just saw a comment on FB asking why the events of 9/11/01 changed EVERYTHING about how we travel by air, but we do nothing after these mass killings at the hand of someone with a gun?
Buildings don’t shelter people, people do.
warren-
Your challenge presupposes that I’ve ever advocated for zero regulation. I haven’t and have many times listed the restrictions and regulations I favor.
dawn-
And I’d wager that if any laws are passed in the wake of this incident, they will be much like the ones that came after 9/11: pointless and designed to make people feel safer rather than actually make them safer. Security theater.
what would all of you say had the shooter been shot and killed inside the school before this happened?
answer: glad someone had a gun!
Steve-
They don’t respond when I give them story after story of people defending themselves and others, so I don’t know why they’d respond to that.
Re: Comment # 1
See: http://tinyurl.com/bpaybtc for a well respected expert’s opinion.
And another adult posting on PoliceOne:
http://tinyurl.com/boczkkq
IMHO, it is time to listen to the voices of reason.
I see the gun advocates jumping to their usual conclusions. Who has asked for guns to be banned? But I will freely tell you this. If taking your guns away would have prevented those babies from being killed today, or prevent the next such senseless act, I would use every ounce of my being to accomplish that.
NO ONE believes getting rid of guns is the answer and I do not think anyone has called for that. Not the Roanoke Times, not Dan and not me.
Your over-reaction says your paranoia is in full alert. We are not coming for your guns. But you might want to consider what your calls for looser and looser gun availability and carry might have wrought.
I was speaking with an Iraq veteran the other day and he assured me that most people who carry are as likely to be killed drawing their weapon as not. Few people have the training needed to react under literal gun fire. Those who keep saying an armed person on the scene (in a kindergarten classroom? Really?) would have possibly made a difference are kidding only themselves.
Now is precisely the time to think and talk about this. People sitting in safety reading and responding to a blog DO need to be made to think. Think what this tragedy is a symptom of. I will add, that my distrust in certain people is being reinforced, mightily. Even a cursory knowledge of the gun control debate knows that no matter the collateral damage the NRA has one focus and one focus only, for us to leave their guns alone.
You let me know when the NRA or VCDL spends one dime on the research to see what causes this mass violence as people decide to go out in a “blaze of glory”.
You let me know when the NRA or VCDL does one PSA that fights the gun culture and the use of guns to solve problems.
You let me know when the NRA or VCDL backs more funding for (or raises money for) mental health screenings and calls for intervention BEFORE these tragedies occur.
“Why wasn’t the school watching who came in and out…”
You kwow, pammala, you comments wouldn’t appear QUITE so ignorant if you bothered to gather a little info before posting.
Well I see that Paddy joined the ever-doltish Mike Huckabee.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/12/14/1339971/huckabee-says-connecticut-school-massacre-occurred-because-we-removed-god-from-our-schools/
“IMHO, it is time to listen to the voices of reason.”
That’s the ticket. We don’t have enough guns. 300 million is a mere pittance.
Sandi-
“I was speaking with an Iraq veteran the other day and he assured me that most people who carry are as likely to be killed drawing their weapon as not. Few people have the training needed to react under literal gun fire. Those who keep saying an armed person on the scene (in a kindergarten classroom? Really?) would have possibly made a difference are kidding only themselves.”
Veteran or not, he’s provably wrong. How many stories do I have to link to before you’ll accept that regular people defend themselves all the time? I am not in the, “If someone had a gun…” crowd, we can never know what would have happened. But it’s false to say that people can’t use guns in stressful situations. You know, like the two I posted in response to you the other day (“upside”, remember)? Didn’t hear back from you on that.
“how would this shooter have killed them without a gun? Would he have got them one by one, with a hat pin through the ear? Would he have smuggled a bomb into the school disguised within a Spiderman lunch box, and blown the whole place up?”
Maybe,….. Don’t be so self rightous.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/china-school-attack_n_2298430.html
The God who allows 18 kindergarten kids to be massacred in order to punish his people is not the God I want to be associated with.
Comment by dave — December 14, 2012 @ 3:11 pm
I overwhelmingly agree. This god helps people make touchdowns, run red lights, and pass exams, but refuses to save innocent children from slaughter. Having read the Bible and The Koran, this doesn’t surprise me a bit. But I guess pistol pete is right, we need a savior. We need to stay home and in churches and just pray it away. If you shut your eyes, and read the part about stoning your insolent children on the outskirts of town, it is almost like our problems don’t even exist… do they pistol pete?
hey dave…
yep, it’s God’s fault. you’re on it, man.
sheesh.
Comment by Frank — December 14, 2012 @ 4:45 pm
frank, you are the one that believes in that archaic, fictitious, nonsense, not us. You own it. Yes, if your omniscient, omnipotent, loving god exists… it IS his fault.
I would like the gun guys – John Wilburn, Jack, Jason etc – to provide some suggestions on how to start mitigating/eliminating these mass shootings. There have been 12 mass shootings so far this year – do you have any suggestions on what might be possible solutions? What is broken that needs to be fixed?
I have had the discussion on the “gun threads” about disallowing those with mental problems;on psychotropic meds;under the care of a psychiatrist etc – why wouldn’t that be a small step in getting guns out of the hands of the Jared Loughner types of individuals?
and for the pious – Where was your “god” @ about 9am when this mass killing of children was happening?
Please tell me how America can tell countries like Syria that they can’t kill their own citizens, yet we do nothing to prevent the slaughter of innocent people in our own country. We are the definition of hypocrite, It’s time for America to look in the mirror and see that we are no better than countries like Syria. NO MORE GUNS that is the ONLY solution, my own country makes me sick. Thoughts and Prayers are not enough, It’s time for action. Now let the gun lovers start the bashing of me, seems that’s what they do best.
It’s a damn shame that we cannot, no way, no how, try to assess the mental health of gun owners and users. Because we have yet another tragedy on our hands, one involving a nut with a gun who shot up an elementary school in Connecticut, and who has killed more than two dozen innocent people, at least 18 of them children./em>
How about—–A young man damaged by the divorce of his parents in a leftwing state? if we continue to offend God by trashing the family structure, very bad things will continue to happen.
Communist Goal #40: “Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.”
pistol pete, so what does the bible say about children? The treatment of your children? The treatment of your enemies children? What does your religion say? What does your god have to say??? NO need to go through the trouble of making up some Kumbaya, alakazam, crazy rant about your faith. Odds are I know the bible better than you, so here you go fella. frank, when you are sober enough, read this later. Bathtub Gin goes straight to your head.
All children who disobey their parents must be stoned to death… seems like the punishment fits the crime. Can I get an Amen?
“If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
“He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.” (Exodus 21:15)
“He that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.” (Exodus 21:17)
“Children who mock their parents will have their eyes plucked out by ravens and eaten by eagles.
The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it.” (Proverbs 30:17)
In the fable of Abraham, parents should be willing to kill their children for God, to show their loyalty and dedication to the voices in their head.
“And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and offer him there for a burnt offering. Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. (Genesis 22:2,10)
Here goes God aaborting children again… God killed all the firstborn children in an entire country.
“The LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon…. And there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead. (Exodus 12:29-30)
God kills children for misbehaving, I guess switches or belts weren’t around in those days.
“And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.” (2 Kings 2:23-24)
God will one day force parents eat their own children. So not only are they to be killed for being mean, but they are a form of livestock now.
“And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.” (Leviticus 26:29)
“And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters.” (Deuteronomy 28:53)
“And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one the flesh of his friend.” (Jeremiah 19:9)
Here you go! The most famous one of them all! Who is up for a miracle?
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” (Psalm 137:9)
So you see pistol pete, your religion shamelessly condones the murder of your own children. So you condone and teach this crap to your children? And you want this taught to mine and other’s children as if it has some moral compass? No thanks.
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 6:02 pm
“I see the gun advocates jumping to their usual conclusions. Who has asked for guns to be banned?”
———-
Hum? I’m I missing something? Which advocates posted what conclusion based exclusively or even primarily in rebuttal of a total ban? Which comment?
It’s a shame that guns are more important than lives in this country. Until we get our priorities straight, these senseless acts will never stop.
I am so very angry and disgusted.
Re: Dan’s OP “There has to be a better way, though.”
—————-
Dan,
Have you moved off your earlier claims of supporting just a couple of more restrictive measures (which, BTW, at this point seem to have no bearing on this tragedy)?
What measures do you now advocate?
I see a degree of ironic incongruity in folk on one side of the political spectrum harping on the other side for not “offered details on which deductions or loopholes they would eliminate to raise revenue” [ http://tinyurl.com/d4mbt8c ] vs. they, themselves, failing to offered details on which law they would propose (or propose eliminating) to stop such tragedies. [As an aside, kudos to Sandi for having enumerated proposals so in the past. Although, I don't agree with her, see does mor that just stand on the side and throw rocks at the other side.]
What is your view of a “better way”, Dan?
Until today I have defended the right of citizens to own guns while believing that the people have the right, through government, to restrict and exercise a measure of reasonable control over that right as related to types of weapons and establishment of areas where guns are not allowed. But after today, I am one who has reached the final straw. Its time to eliminate guns from our society and launch an all out war on the gun culture. Not one of the lives of those innocent kids today is worth trading for the rights of some fearful citizen who thinks he has to carry a loaded weapon ecery where he goes to be safe. And not one of those lives is worth tradfing for the citizen who carres a loaded weapon because it makea him feel macho or powerful. And not one of those lives is worth trading to prop up the profits of the arms industry and the gun manufacturers. The paranoid gun crowd has crouched in fear for the past four years in the belief that “Obama is coming for their guns” though there has been no sign that he has any such intention. They have resisted every proposal for reasonable common sense restrictions and regulations to try to get the gun culture under control. Well I say it’s time Mr President. Go for it.
Dave Hicks, #19 pammala 2:13PM starts with pretending this is about guns: “get a grip people, it ‘s the person not hte weapon, he would’ve found any other weapon to do his murdering”
Then Pistol Pete does it in #23 @2:21PM with “You ban guns, this stuff gets worse because the black market skyrockets.
You already see more ‘illegal’ gun owners because of the background checks. If we ban ALL guns…”
In #40 @2:53PM, Another Debbie says: “tortured until you and the the rest of the gun hating liberals finally figure out these people will find another way to kill. Cain killed Able with out a gun. The Romans ruled a huge empire with out guns and these people will find a way to kill with out them.”
#49 @3:40PM George Krutz made fun of the idea with: “Ban automobiles now.”
And from the first link you yourself offered #74 @5:35PM: “Mere minutes had passed before some hack was on the air and wasting oxygen talking about disarming Americans.”
Please do not try to diminish what I answered by asking who spoke “exclusively or even primarily in rebuttal of a total ban“. It is there.
Re: dave @ 7:50 pm
——————
Sandi,
Looks as if you now have an answer to your, “Who has asked for guns to be banned?”
Re: Lynda K @ 7:43 pm
So what are the details of your proposal, Lynda?
First:
Prayers go out to the victims and their families in Connecticut today. Evil knows no limits. Truly heartbreaking.
Second: The Solution to deter more of this.
http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/2012/12/14/front-sight-special-blog-when-will-we-wake-up/
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 7:55 pm
“It is there.”
—————–
Could that be in response the the actual calls for a total ban that you are alleging hasn’t been made?
Nothing wrong with my link, as the author was right.
I think the handle has now
completely separated itself
from Ellie Mae’s skillet.
Dave Hicks, even a moron like me can see that this is about much more than guns. The availability of guns coupled with the problems people see them as a solution to, are what we, as a nation have got to focus on.
Like I said, if I thought banning guns, or even more restrictions on the gun would fix this problem, I would become the Carrie Nation of gun control. It is simply too late for any of those solutions to work. Facts remain facts, but closing the barn door after the stampede is pretty useless work.
1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide
2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide
3. Across states, more guns = more homicide
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html
But none of that matters now. What matters is that we fix the problem that is still causing people to “lose it” and take as many people, or children out with them as they can. I will not blame “mental illness” either, because I believe evil exists and has its own twisted reasoning that those without that bent cannot fully fathom. Serial killers and mass gunmen are quite often disturbed but it goes beyond mere mental illness. The logistics and activity involved goes beyond anyone in a psychotic state IMO. We have got to get past the idea that “big brother” is the bad guy for knowing anything about you and change the fact that seeking help is stigmatizing and often non-existent. We have big fish to fry here and it would be a blessing if the gun advocates could work WITH us to figure this out, instead of whining that we are after their guns. Or do you want to be one dimensional?
Yes Dave Hicks, they are all in response to a call for an actual total ban that has not been made. It is an attempt to make the gun advocates seem the victim of some conspiracy that is not afoot.
I did not say there was anything “wrong” with your link, I said he responds to the same non-call too. It is freaking ridiculous and counter-productive.
At the time the framers of the 2nd Amendment wrote that amendment, it took several minutes to load their muskets with a single bullet [ball]. Could they have ever imagined an AK47 or M16?
What is the need for any American to own military grade mass-multiple-bullet guns? Surely they aren’t for personal self-defense or for hunting. Such guns are made for one purpose – killing as many people as quickly as possible. Unless a person is part of the military there doesn’t seem to be a legitimate need to own such a weapon.
I understand we can’t solve this problem of gun violence easily or quickly, but that doesn’t mean we simply shrug our shoulders and do nothing after each and every mass shooting, does it?
FYI – I’m all for allowing Americans to own single-bullet guns…
Re: dave @ 7:50 pm
How do you reconcile:
Your, “Its time to eliminate guns from our society and launch an all out war on the gun culture” with your, “paranoid gun crowd”?
Are there folk advocating a total ban or not?
FWIIW, I’m not worried. As one of the links I posted said,
**
Forget about it. It’s not going to happen in the United States of America.
As they say, “That dog won’t hunt.”
Americans will not allow themselves to be disarmed.
**
However, where is the paranoia in those folk that do believe that there are forces at work to ban all private ownership of firearms?
IMHO, it cannot lie in the belief that there are those who harbor that intent.
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 8:35 pm
“Yes Dave Hicks, they are all in response to a call for an actual total ban that has not been made.”
Vs.
Re: dave @ 7:50 pm
“Its time to eliminate guns from our society and launch an all out war on the gun culture”
——————
Someone is in denial, and it is not me.
hey justin, …all i did was call attention to dave’s blame of God for the tragedy…which Dave did do. and you have to go and get all anti religion on me. give it a break man. God is not the root of all evil, nor through him is the route to all trouble.
hey justin…, PEOPLE do stupid, illegal, un-caring, hurtful, and horrendous things to other people all by themselves. God can’t prevent it. God doesn’t cause it. People do those things. Whether they be christians, jews, muslims, atheists, whatever…, if they do things like i just mentioned, they are either crazy, or have no will power to chose not to do the things they do. it’s really that simple.
justin, the blame is on us.
I know that not all who participate in this blog are not believers. Nonetheless, a friend shared what I am about to post with me earlier this evening. As a believer, I have to admit that I don’t understand why such events happen. I don’t understand what causes someone to commit such evil acts. Because I am a believer, at times like these I ask my God for insight and guidance. I accept that some of you think I’m crazy for doing so. Nonetheless, I pray. So I share this prayer that was shared with me. It originated with Max Lucado.
http://maxlucado.com/read/blog/a-christmas-prayer/?utm_source=MaxLucado.com+Weekday+Emails&utm_campaign=f30635ae67-A_CHRISTMAS_PRAYER12_14_2012&utm_medium=email
Sorry for the double negative in my first sentence.
@94 – Dave Hicks writes: “So what are the details of your proposal, Lynda?”
Let’s take a look at countries that have low gun crime and see what they do. Perhaps it is time to consider limitations on what can be owned, who can own it, and how it must be purchased and owned, in terms of registrations/permits, etc.
Would you not be willing to compromise any of your precious gun “rights’ to prevent another child from dying at the hands of a deranged lunatic with a gun?
Conservatives rail on about the dangers of gay marriage, birth control, abortion, unions and socialism but they are noticeably silent when 20 elementary school children are gunned down inside their safe-zone. Where is the horror? Where are the demands that it stop? Where are the family values now?
“There are more than 129,817 federally licensed firearms dealers in the United States, according to the latest Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives numbers (as of Aug. 1). Of those, 51,438 are retail gun stores, 7,356 are pawn shops and 61,562 are collectors, with the balance of the licenses belonging mostly to manufacturers and importers of firearms and destructive devices.
For comparison, here are some numbers of other ubiquitous elements of American life:
Gas Stations in the U.S. (2011): 143,839 (source TD LINX/Nielsen via National Associations of Convenience Stores, Association for Convenience for Convenience and Fuel Retailing)
Grocery Stores in the U.S. (2011) 36,569 (source: Food Marketing Institute)
McDonald’s restaurants in the U.S. (2011): 14,098 (Source: McDonald’s Corporation Annual Report 2011)”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/08/guns-in-america-a-statistical-look/
Proliferation matters when it is obesity inducing food…
Keep throwing those verses Justin. Ill keep praying you read them in Context.
You really come after me, I must hit a nerve.
Justin, God has been punishing empires and nations that spite him since Creation. Egypt, Romans, etc.. Its all History.
Now he is punishing another country that has turned his back on Him.
Christians all over are praying for Christ’s return. I pray that many will turn to him before then.
Like post 41..Matthew 24
where is the lib outrage over these facts from the CDC?:
1. in 2010, 7 teens aged 16-19 died in auto crashes EVERY DAY.
2. in 2010, per mile driven, teen drivers aged 16-19 were 3X more likely to die in an auto crash than drivers aged 20+.
If libs are serious about “guns” killing people, where is the lib outrage about teen drivers killing people? oh. i know where it is. …it’s the roads that are dangerous….not the drivers.
Ron May,
Thank you for posting the Christmas Prayer.
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 8:35 pm
“I said he responds to the same non-call too. It is freaking ridiculous and counter-productive.”
——————
Sandi,
I have no desire to put you in the position of proving a negative.
So, I am not demanding that you prove it was a “non-call.”
However, IMHO, it is ridiculous and counter-productive to deny that there are those who are making that “call” — i.e., those who do support a total ban or near total ban of private ownership.
Why, counter-productive?
1) Because the actual call for eliminating guns from our society is documented (including right here on this blog). I have heard it, in real life — at rally, meetings, the State Legislature, etc.. Some of the proposals from the mouths of players on the pro-more-restriction crowd are paramount to bans on all but the very rich and the very well connected owning guns. Comments about only allowing private ownership of the equivalent of a musket isn’t far from a ban, IMHO.
2) Assuming, arguendo, that you were right that no one in the extreme array of the pro-more-restriction crowd had ever made such a call, your poo pooing the fear out of hand does nothing to diminish that fear and gain cooperation.
3) There are far too many folk in the array of the pro-more-restriction crowd that come across as having the strategy of “give us an inch and we will take a mile, eventually.” Think of Dan’s claim of only wanting a couple of minor changes in Virginia law vs. his OP comment “There has to be a better way, though.”
The hypocrisy of some of the pro-more-restriction crowd screams out from time-to-time — such as when an anti gun senator in Chicago was arrested for bringing a gun to an airport. [ http://tinyurl.com/b78q8o9 ]
IMHO, it ultimately comes down to whom do you trust. And I’m not seeing much from the pro-more-restriction crowd that builds my trust.
Sandi,
There are approximately 13-14,000,000 teenaged drivers in the US. Why do so many of them end up tragically dead? Were the autos they were in the cause of their deaths? Was it the roads’ fault?
Or, was it possibly the teenagers themselves who caused the tragedy?
Auto wrecks are the leading cause of death in teenagers aged 16-19.
Seven teenagers die each day due to auto wrecks.
Where is the outrage?
Misplaced blame is tragic itself.
Do we honestly think our leaders will have “an honest discussion” about guns when they can’t even pass a frikkin budget? Remember the “war” Congress waged on big tobacco? The Feds proudly took on and ultimately confiscated billions from tobacco companies as supposed punishment for pushing a substance on the populace that kills them? And now most states like Virginia, through their Governors, are pissing their share away incentivizing other businesses so those same Governors and their cabinets can look good as they aspire to higher offices. So we punish an industry that produces a legal substance that we love to tax, one that people buy willingly full well knowing what they are doing to harm themselves….but God forbid we take on the gun lobby? A gun lobby that defends an industry that produces something that kills innocent people? Our own John Edwards will not even stand up to these gun kooks in Richmond! An honest discussion about guns??? Give me a frikkin break.
Here’s another set of numbers for you Sandi. The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million privately owned firearms in America. Others put that figure between 240 and 270 million. So let’s say we pass a law tonight that says no one can buy a firearm and no manufacturer can make another one for anyone other than military/police. Let’s say we also completely ban private ownership/possession. Given that very few states or localities currently require registration for the firearms already in existence, how do ever possibly know who already has a gun? How do we go about getting those off the street so to speak/
That is the reason that arguments for gun control laws in America are seldom more than political pandering in an attempt to appease certain segments of the populace. In reality that ship has already sailed. I’m not against limiting who can own guns and tighter restrictions on military style weapons. However, the “blame the gun” crowd needs to realize that these laws will not cure these ills. We need to focus on security. And no Dan, asking what went wrong with the school’s security protocols is not blaming the victims. It’s a necessary step in trying to make sure it doesn’t happen again. But you guys need to realize that poor security is not the problem. Too many guns is also not the problem. Treating these ills may help, but that is more like treating the symptoms of a disease. The true problem is that we have a society full of people who have “evolved” into a culture that thinks this kind of carnage is the answer to some perceived problem. There is something fundamentally wrong with these people and until we figure out what it is and how to fix it, no law, no restriction and no security protocol will stop it.
Many Prayers for the families of this senseless act. May God’s healing presence comfort you during your loss in this time of much sadness.
Dave Hicks,
I agree that banning all guns is not a viable solution to the problem of gun violence. I agree that people kill people, not guns. I suspect that is all we will agree on here. A number of posters have called for a discussion of solutions, yet we continue to “kick this can down the road” as Alfred noted.
You posted two links, and I have picked two quotes from the links:
“Officers need to continue to arm themselves off and on duty, while training for this incident. It seems more likely than ever that you will face an active shooter in your career.”
Comment from the Dave Hicks link at 5:35 p.m.
I am struck by the second half of the statement that officers are more likely than ever to face an active shooter. Why is that? My initial reaction is the abundance of guns in our society. What are your thoughts on this?
“Doug, I believe in facing modern threats with modern solutions. I believe in armed pilots, armed teachers, armed judges, and armed fill-in-the-blank. I believe we need good people — who are good shots — who are armed in today’s world.”
Comment from the Dave Hicks link at 5:47 p.m.
The solution offered in this article is clearly to arm more people. The article further advocates training a teacher (arming him/her) on every floor in every school in tactical active shooter situations so the threats can be killed quicker. Both citations were from a web site catering to police officers. I am dumbfounded at this escalation mentality.
I presume that you agree with these solutions since you posted the links.
Gun restrictions that I favor include:
1. Limit magazine capacity for rifles and handguns to 12 rounds;
2. Require background checks for all purchases at legal gun shops and guns shows;
“The solution offered in this article is clearly to arm more people. The article further advocates training a teacher (arming him/her) on every floor in every school in tactical active shooter situations so the threats can be killed quicker. Both citations were from a web site catering to police officers. I am dumbfounded at this escalation mentality.”
Comment by Nosaj, referring to a link that Dave Hicks posted
The idea that we need to arm a teacher on every floor of every school only scratches the surface of the problem we’re facing.
We also need to arm mall security guards, pastors in churches, people who man supermarket parking lots, etc. etc. etc. Under this idea, we need to have armed guards in EVERY stinking public place, too. Ice skating rink, football stadiums, nursery schools, EVERY restaurant, ad infinitum.
Because under the gunners’ logic, if there are armed guards in schools the nuts-with-guns are simply going to go to malls or churches or other places there are no armed guards.
The writer of the post Dave Hicks linked to MUST believe that we need armed guard at every public place, every day. And THAT’S what makes his post so ridiculous.
Another perspective:
“Now is exactly the time to press for gun control, and the NRA knows it, which is why they are desperate to avoid the argument all together. The gun lobby has never once come back and said ‘now would be a good time to have that discussion we did not want to have in the wake of [costs over $40 billion a year. Yet drug addicts are much more likely to kill themselves than another person, and if they do kill another person it is most likely to be with a gun. If it is right for the government to ban the sale and possession of drugs, then it is right for the government to control guns.
Where I do agree with the gun lobby is that half measures won’t work. Over the past thirty years the gun lobby has resisted every attempt at a balanced approach to gun control. Why bother to moderate our demands at all when they won’t accept any compromise, and when the status quo, ruled by gun advocates, has obviously failed?
Forget the assault weapons ban, it’s time to ban guns completely.”
http://americablog.com/2012/12/its-time-to-ban-guns-completely.html
Frank
As usual your comprehension skills fail to keep up with your mouth . My post about god was in response to paddy o bryans ridiculous assertion
, supported by. Pp that this tragedy was the result of god punishing our country for some perceived sinful lifestyle. My comment was that I would not be associated with such a god . I did not assert that blame. They did. Wake up or post when your brain isn’t dead, if possible
Re: Dan Casey @ 11:34 pm
So, what do you actually propose, Dan? Come on, ‘fess-up.
—–
I think that I have been clear for some time. IMHO, any place that is posted as “no firearms” should carry with that posting elevated security. If a location is sensitive enough to disarm folk, it deserves elevated security, IMHO. Why should judges be protected by metal-detectors and armed guards but not children?
I also suggest that such postings establish a “special relationship” in tort litigation. A special relationship imposes duties upon a party where normally the law would not, such as protecting another from criminal attack by third party. Nonfeasance-based tort actions can arise where the plaintiff shows that the defendant should have intervened by controlling a third party or by taking measures to protect the plaintiff from injury. This was a key issue in the VT tort actions following the tragedy there.
Re: nosaj — @ 10:52 pm
“I presume that you agree with these solutions since you posted the links.”
—————–
Pretty much. See my last.
I would support legal carry for self-defense pretty much anywhere that there is not a significant level of elevated security in place.
I would support every teacher being able to be armed, if she/he wish to be, and some special provisions made to arm and provide active-shooter training to many of them such as proposed on PoliceOne.
—–
As an aside, BTW, assuming, arguendo, that that the reports that the shooter was underage to buy a handgun and stole it from the legal owner (his mother, whom he also killed) what bearing would your second restriction have on this tragedy?
Re: Dan Casey @ 11:42 pm
Thanks for the conformation of my earlier point that there are calls for a total ban.
Now, what is your position on that “perspective”, which you posted. Note that I have agreed to nosaj presumption that I agreed with the solutions for which I posted the links. Can he, I, or the rest of us make the same presumption about your posting the link to “Forget the assault weapons ban, it’s time to ban guns completely”?
Shrillary-
“I would like the gun guys – John Wilburn, Jack, Jason etc – to provide some suggestions on how to start mitigating/eliminating these mass shootings. There have been 12 mass shootings so far this year – do you have any suggestions on what might be possible solutions? What is broken that needs to be fixed?
I have had the discussion on the “gun threads” about disallowing those with mental problems;on psychotropic meds;under the care of a psychiatrist etc – why wouldn’t that be a small step in getting guns out of the hands of the Jared Loughner types of individuals?”
I have given my list of proposals (for what they are worth, which might be nothing) many many times in this forum. Aggressive enforcement and sentencing for straw purchasers, building better social safety nets, tearing down the cultural biases surrounding mental illness, ending the drug war, etc.). If there are holes in NICS that cause dangerous people to not be flagged, that needs to be fixed.
The real problem with saying, “We need to do more to keep mentally ill people from guns,” is that many of them have no history that would get them flagged. You have to be adjudicated mentally ill, not simply sought out treatment. If every person who ever saw a therapist or took prozac was flagged, you’d bar millions of people who would never hurt anyone for the possibility of catching the few who would.
There is also the potential chilling effect. As a culture we stigmatize mental health, we see it as not being “really” sick. What standard could we impose that would be fair to law abiding people without scaring them from getting treatment? The irony is that tighter screening might scare off people from getting treatment which could lead to more violence. It’s a tricky question and I sure as hell don’t have the answer.
dave-
“Well I say it’s time Mr President. Go for it.”
Beautiful. And watch as Republicans hold both houses of congress and the White House for the next 50 years.
Shrillary-
“At the time the framers of the 2nd Amendment wrote that amendment, it took several minutes to load their muskets with a single bullet [ball].”
Picking nits here, but they could load multiple rounds in under a minute. But I know what you are saying.
“Could they have ever imagined an AK47 or M16?”
Specifically? No. But they saw advances in firearms technology during their own lifetimes. They weren’t stupid, and many of them, Jefferson and Franklin especially, were big on science and knew that things would continue to evolve in a natural direction, which means lighter, more powerful, faster to fire, longer range, etc. They knew what traits they desired in the guns of the day.
“What is the need for any American to own military grade mass-multiple-bullet guns? Surely they aren’t for personal self-defense or for hunting.”
Need has nothing to do with it. But aside from that, the guns most often used in these crimes aren’t military grade. Military grade guns can fire in automatic or fully automatic mode. These weapons are just semi-automatic rifles that look mean. Semi-automatic weapons have been in the hands of civilians for a century or more. It’s not some crazy moon technology that just now popped up. And the ammunition used in these weapons isn’t anywhere near the top of the food chain in terms of power. They are mid-sized cartridges. Those pretty wood-stocked deer rifles in your grandpas’s gun case are a hell of a lot more powerful. Finally, these guns are used in sports and hunting. Their light weight, modularity, and accuracy make them a good choice (much as the Mauser action was used in the military, it has remained the standard for bolt action hunting weapons for nearly 100 years. They make great self defense weapons for all of those reasons, plus the .223/5.56 round won’t over penetrate like many handgun and shotgun rounds. So if you hit a bad guy or miss altogether, the round is less likely to punch through two or three walls, keep going, and his someone innocent.
“Unless a person is part of the military there doesn’t seem to be a legitimate need to own such a weapon.”
As horrifying as these events are, we have to remember that long guns, that is all rifles and all shotguns, of which “assault weapons” are a sub group, are used in about five percent of all gun murders. If you erased them off the planet tomorrow, we might not notice the difference. The idiot today used two handguns.
“Let’s take a look at countries that have low gun crime and see what they do. Perhaps it is time to consider limitations on what can be owned, who can own it, and how it must be purchased and owned, in terms of registrations/permits, etc.”
I’m all for putting anything potentially constructive on the table, but you can’t just copy and paste laws from other countries. The cultures are different, the entire legal systems are different, we have crappy social safety nets while theirs are more robust, and on and on.
The best way I’ve heard it put is, we don’t have more murders than European countries because we have more guns, we have more murders because we are a more violent people. Take away all of the guns and we’d still be substantially more murderous than them. That’s what needs to be looked at, the underlying causes, but that’s complicated, expensive, and as politically viable as banning all guns.
Dan Casey-
“Forget the assault weapons ban, it’s time to ban guns completely.”
http://americablog.com/2012/12/its-time-to-ban-guns-completely.html”
Of what value is such a proposal? Even countries with far lower murder rates haven’t gone this far, and they don’t have the ingrained gun culture or already huge number of guns we do. If any attempt was made to do this we’d have a miniature civil war. The writer might as well have proposed wishing away the violence.
The classless left didn’t even wait for the bodies to cool before they started in with their political agenda on gun control. In the past, they might have waited a day. Not this time.
The RT has a highly offensive and tasteless cartoon in the paper the day after the massacre: the same one appeared online the day OF the massacre.
The guns were all legally purchased by the man’s mother. Connecticut is among the states the strictest gun laws in the nation. OK? The act happened in the heart of liberal la-la land. It wasn’t the guns. It was a deranged kid who, no doubt, underwent a lot of psychological damage because of the disintegration of his family.
Jason @12:50 am Very well said.
With due respect to all of my fellow bloggers we need to stop the calls for a complete ban of guns. We also need to stop equating events like today to teenage driving deaths or deaths caused in auto accidents generally. Events like the one which happened today, earlier this week, in Arizona & VT are, in my view, about mental health issues.
There are many issues involving how easy it is to obtain firearms in our nation that I would like to see tackled. Chief among them is how to keep firearms out of the hands of people who are known to have mental health challenges. Our society, over the course of the last several years has begun to defund public programs to house & treat such people. We’ve chosen to close public facilities and reduced or eliminated programs serving many of our most vulnerable people.
I admit that I don’t have ready solutions or answers to the challenges we confront when events like what happened in Connecticut occur. As our leaders in Washington debate whether we will go off the fiscal cliff, we have to consider carefully how we can insure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare. In all that discussion we have to find a way to keep destructive weapons out of the hands of those who would harm themselves or us. In short we have to find a balance between protecting our right to bear arms and protecting the basic right of our fellow humans to life itself. I have to admit that I am not optimistic we will find common ground anytime soon.
Anyone who thinks that the GOP could take both houses and the WH over guns hasn’t been paying attention to the GOP.
I’m also not sure why we should give up on a substantial, if not total, ban or limitation on the types and number of firearms that a single private citizen can own, in addition to reasonable registration and licensure procedures. There is only one thing we know for sure, and that’s that the “system” – or lack of system- we have currently is a failure. And as an opponent of unregulated armory ownership, its not my problem to fix. IMO it’s up to the gun people to solve this problem, because theyve authored it.
Again, I read long verbose explanations of “we can’t do that, because this! All sorts of reasons we’ve become hostage to anyone who feels like stock piling enough arms to take over a small country.
Why doesn’t the rest of the world suffer from these problems? How come they’re bright enough to figure it out? Why are we on the short-bus in this regard? I’m not interested in hearing how “guns are our heritage” ” we have a gun-culture here” “guns built this country” or other mindless platitudes. We all have a “heritage” of living in caves chewing raw meat, and we’ve progressed beyond that. Why are we still stuck in this retrograde gun thing?
there is no answer….crimes like this tragedy cannot be stopped as long as we as citizens have freedom…..but even in countries where citizens do not have freedom…..atrocities and genocide happen…..since the dawn of time events similar to this has happened…before guns we as humans used clubs…..what is the difference between a single shooter doing this….and a bomb ….missile…..or fire from “rebels”…or terrorists….religious fanatics….if there were no guns….we as humans would find something else to use to kill….using any excuse to justify the evil deeds that happen
Frank,
Please stop with the car and gun comparison, it does not help. If you want to use cars in your analogy, you need to use a BB gun for the other. Both have the potential to kill if wrongly used. Or you could use an armour tank as the vehicle if you want a better analogy… it is built for killing, protection and perhaps target shooting but street safe if we blindly trust the driver. Btw, Is it legal to own a tank? It has a gun and will go along way toward protection.
Do you support a tank in every garage? If not, why?
#29…Yeah, Dave..lets also ban cars, knives, icy steps, parachutes, rivers and lakes(drowning), train tracks,airplanes, tall bridges and buildings…they kill too…Wake up, moron…guns will always be here and there is NOTHING you can do about it…except worry. People kill people…if you own a gun and have seen it load itself, and walk across the room and shoot a projectile, then maybe you`re not stable enough for ownership.
Tell us, pammala, how would this shooter have killed them without a gun? Would he have got them one by one, with a hat pin through the ear? Would he have smuggled a bomb into the school disguised within a Spiderman lunch box, and blown the whole place up?
Comment by Dan Casey — December 14, 2012 @ 2:22 pm
Dan, “a hatpin through the ear”! Don’t be so sarcastic. Perhaps, he’d have killed them like the guy in Asia who killed twenty-two the other day…maybe a knife. Maybe he’d have used a freshly sharpened pencil, or a pair of scissors.
I’m a teacher, an elementary public school, female, almost retirement age, non-gun-owning, anti-gun teacher. I can tell you a dozen ways this horrific tragedy could happen right here at my Roanoke Valley school. I can’t tell you how to stop it because we will never, NEVER get murder weapons, not even guns, away from those who want to kill. IF we could keep that crazy person from entering the school with a gun, we could not keep him away from our playground or our pick-up and unload areas. I have, for years, had nightmares about such a scenario playing out at my school. We’re told to keep our doors locked and we address untagged strangers in our building. There are strange and scary parents, too, who have every right to be there, to say the least of scary students. I KNOW that many of my babies, who are so young, innocent and trusting, could be lost in the blink of an eye to any of the dozen pairs of scissors in my classroom before I could stop a killer…if I could stop a killer. I would gladly lay down my life for my children, I love them so. But, I don’t want to die and I have but one life to give. What I think I want is to carry a concealed weapon in my classroom.
Ah, yes, Doto with the name calling. About what one would expect from the guy.
There is only one thing we know for sure, and that’s that the “system” – or lack of system- we have currently is a failure.
These guns were bought according to the leftwing blueprint, Kristen. Totally by the book.
The fact is, a criminal–or a poorly raised kid— can get a firearm regardless of the laws in place.
“Dan, “a hatpin through the ear”! Don’t be so sarcastic. Perhaps, he’d have killed them like the guy in Asia who killed twenty-two the other day…maybe a knife. Maybe he’d have used a freshly sharpened pencil, or a pair of scissors.
I’m a teacher, an elementary public school, female, almost retirement age, non-gun-owning, anti-gun teacher. I can tell you a dozen ways this horrific tragedy could happen right here at my Roanoke Valley school. I can’t tell you how to stop it because we will never, NEVER get murder weapons, not even guns, away from those who want to kill. IF we could keep that crazy person from entering the school with a gun, we could not keep him away from our playground or our pick-up and unload areas.”
–Comment by RCH
Many on this thread have compared the massacre in Connecticut with the knife attacks in China. But there’s a key difference — at the school in China NOBODY DIED. Do you get that? NOBODY DIED.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/14/china-knife-attack-school.html
People can argue all they want that other weapons can kill, and that things that aren’t weapons can kill, like cars. OMG I’m getting tired of the dumb posts repeating that silly refrain. But that argument is complete and utter BS. In terms of their efficiency as personal killing machines, guns beat them all to hell.
There’s a reason armies aren’t armed with hatpins (or cars), and they are armed with guns, after all. Jeesh. Y’all are hurting your own cause with such idiotic arguments.
well said, RCH.
The sick minds of folks who will exploit any and all tragedies to pursue a political gain, are, well, exploitatively sick.
If we want to figure out the “cause and effect” process behind these killings, I’d suggest a careful, thoughtful review of computer and video games….which are desensitizing generations of our kids to horrifying concepts of killing.
Yeah, I know, that would trample on first amendment rights…
#76…So glad to hear that you`re not coming for our guns, Sandi…the relief I`m feeling can`t be described in words.
hey Mutt,
Are you serious, ’cause your anology of a car to a bb gun is pathetic. Think about it. How many people are killed by bb guns every year? we already know that 7 teenagers are killed by autos EVERY DAY…
RCH, no one died in the China knife attack. You are incorrect. People who want to kill quickly and efficiently use guns. To deny that is just stupid. There is no apt comparison to guns and the role they play.
Hey Dan…..Guns are here forever. You are the `Prince` of the idiotic argument.
Jason at 12:50 a.m., I definitely appreciate the measured and thoughtful manner in which you approach this issue. You said:
“I have given my list of proposals (for what they are worth, which might be nothing) many many times in this forum. Aggressive enforcement and sentencing for straw purchasers, building better social safety nets, tearing down the cultural biases surrounding mental illness, ending the drug war, etc.). If there are holes in NICS that cause dangerous people to not be flagged, that needs to be fixed.”
I agree with you on eachof these initiatives, especially ending the miserably misguided war on drugs. Refining what we already have in place will save lives. I would only add to this list background checks at gun shows anda reduction in magazine capacity.
However, I part ways with your analysis on two points.
“Need has nothing to do with it.” If you base your right to own a firearm on the 2nd Amendment, then you are essentially saying that you need a firearm to protect yourself from threats and to maintain a militia. Allowing for some small variation in what individuals will identify as “need,” I fail to see why any individual would need more than five firearms. I think we can reduce the shear numbers of guns by reducing the need factor, and this might be a step toward reducing the glamour surrounding gun possession in our current culture. I continue to think more guns equals more gun deaths, and reducing the number of guns will reduce the number of deaths.
“As horrifying as these events are, we have to remember that long guns, that is all rifles and all shotguns, of which “assault weapons” are a sub group, are used in about five percent of all gun murders. If you erased them off the planet tomorrow, we might not notice the difference. The idiot today used two handguns.” With about 20,000 murders a year in the US, a 5% reduction would result in saving 1,000 lives. I think we can work on the definition of “assault weapon” to prevent traditional hunting weapons from being declared illegal, but saving 1,000 lives is persuasuve.
You have carved out a very reasonable place to begin this discussion! Thank you.
Hey Frank,
Maybe they should ban malls, right? Or elementary schools, movie theaters, college classrooms. None of those are explicitly protected by the constitution, right? If elementary schools didn’t exist, then the killings yesterday of all those kids could not have happened, right Frank?
AND, there’s a conservative political side benefit to this: With no schools, the populace would be stupider, and thus more likely to be swayed by the philosophical garbage spewed by the right wing. You’ll expand your base of voters, which the RWers badly need to do right now, because people won’t know how to think for themselves.
There is so much I would dispute with the Comment by Jason — December 15, 2012 @ 12:50 am – but brevity works best in posts, so a few points:
“Picking nits here, but they could load multiple rounds in under a minute. But I know what you are saying.”
You claim, in your post, that I was “nit picking” to demonstrate the FACT that at the time of the writing of the 2nd Amendment, there were none of the weapons available today. In fact, even if they were super duper marksmen in the 18th century, it still would be impossible to murder 20 innocents in the span of minutes using a musket. And no, I do not for one minute believe Jefferson or Franklin could look into the future and see the mass slaughter of fellow Americans using today’s weapons. Had they had an inkling, the 2nd Amendment would look very different, if it existed at all.
You gave your list of some solutions, however, why isn’t background checks at gun shows on your list? Also, are you saying that because it may be difficult to track the mentally ill we shouldn’t attempt to do so? If stigmatizing the mentally ill is a reason NOT to prevent them from owning guns, what does the fact that in most cases the mental illness is brought out by the media in a negative light when these mass killings occur? Isn’t that more stigmatizing to the mentally ill? Doesn’t that make Americans look at ALL mentally ill as dangerous? Prevention and education would go a long way in decriminalizing the mentally ill.
Is doing nothing better than something because it may have a “chilling” effect?
Although I know you are no fan of the NRA,the fact is that the NRA has spent billions in conjunction with gun and ammo manufacturers to convince the populace to associate
guns = safety. Why are NRA members not as outraged as most of the population when these murderous acts are committed with guns that can mow down 20 kindergarteners? Why won’t their membership put pressure on the NRA to in fact, act on some of the suggestions like the ones you’ve enumerated?
Why should we as a nation not feel compelled to provide both an increased funding for mental health and common sense gun regulations? Why should we simply accept your premise that we are a more violent society – and then not address it because it may be politically toxic or expensive. Again, is doing nothing better than a measured approach to do what needs to be done?
RCH, if you are referring to the incident described in Bob’s earlier post on 12/14/2012 at 6:18 p.m., then the article cited indicates 22 people were injured. I did not see a reference to a death.
Yes, people will choose other methods to injure and kill, but if this assailant in China had used a gun, I suspect there would have been deaths.
With all due respect, you carrying a concealed weapon in the classroom may well cause as much unintended harm as not. Do you think you could shoot an assailant without injuring someone else in your classroom? If you fired three shots, two of which killed the assailant on one of which killed a student, would that be acceptable?
i have the solution for all of the anti-gun warriors! obama care to require everyone in the country to have a mental evaluation by age ten. re-test subjects on an annual basis, apply the three strike rule for those who fail to meet the prescribed criteria and care for them with entitlements. give handguns to all stable citizens over eighteen. setup escrow accounts for underaged children and on every july 4th each community will be required to have a gathering at city hall, acknowledge those who become eligible and present them with their own gun. at noon, all in attendance will be allowed to draw their prized sidearm, shoot in the air and celebrate by dancing like savages around a makeshift fire. anyone out of line will be shot, the weapon confiscated and reserved for next in line. think about all of the production, mental health, prison and construction jobs that would be created, not to mention the peace of mind knowing all are armed and protected from the gun nuts… sigh
archie bunker had it right! hand guns to all passengers when boarding an aircraft. collect them upon arrival. hey, who in their right or wrong mind would attempt to highjack the plane. case closed….
better than being indoctrinated by a simple minded marxist tyrant, like they are now
“The sick minds of folks who will exploit any and all tragedies to pursue a political gain, are, well, exploitatively sick.
If we want to figure out the “cause and effect” process behind these killings, I’d suggest a careful, thoughtful review of computer and video games….which are desensitizing generations of our kids to horrifying concepts of killing.
Yeah, I know, that would trample on first amendment rights…”
Comment by Frank — December 15, 2012 @ 10:00 am
Frank, if you choose to view this tragedy through the lens of exploitation, there will be plenty of that to go around in the next few days and weeks. Unfortunately, you will miss the point. What can be done to reduce these incidents? Just as importantly, what can we do to address that, daily, around 30 people are killed in the US with a gun? That means this tragedy repeats itself every single day!
I agree with you about taking a look at video games. Violence in this realm is glorified, and we would be fooling ourselves not to explore their impact.
From my view, there is one side of this debate calling for a reduction in the numbers of guns as a means to save lives and one side of the debate calling for arming as many people as possible to save lives. Who is doing the exploiting? Which do you think makes the most sense?
70.warren-
“Your challenge presupposes that I’ve ever advocated for zero regulation. I haven’t and have many times listed the restrictions and regulations I favor.”
comment by Jason
Jason, I know from your previous posts that you’re not an absolutist, thus you weren’t among those reactionaries I mentioned. And I admire that you’re able to tell that calling anyone who’s not a gun absolutist (itself a type of 2A hypocrisy) an “anti” is both inaccurate and counter-productive, Have you noticed that there’s at least one VCDL member on this blog who doesn’t seem to know that?
“They don’t respond when I give them story after story of people defending themselves and others, so I don’t know why they’d respond to that”
another comment by Jason
Jason, anecdotes are not the plural of data. There are dozens of good uses of firearms for self-protection in the U.S. each year, and tens of thousands of episodes of gun violence. Just yesterday’s events alone gave the violence count nearly thirty lives more than yesterday’s self-defense anecdotes. Anecdotal inference is simplistic denial.
And if you’re inclined to cite episodes that “never happened” because of preventive gun carry, you’ll need to acknowledge that those nebulous, impossible to identify episodes are nonetheless vastly outnumbered by the episodes of non-violence that constantly occur with no gun present.
“Someone is in denial, and it is not me”
comment from the highly selective but flattered to think himself an objective logician Dave Hicks
Remember a year ago when Dave Hicks said that the gun murder of a police officer in Montgomery Co. cuased him some restless nights? Okay, now guess who’s not reported any other discomfort by the many gun deaths since then that happened far enough from Dave Hicks’ own neighborhood not to impinge on his concience?
That’s right: Dave Hicks, self-recognized honest thinker.
That’s some big NIMBY you rely on there, Mr. Not-In-Denial.
Frank and pistol pete,
Perhaps you folks from the religious right need to pull together and figure out exactly it is your god will and will not punish us for.
Frank says that I cannot blame god for everything. You are exactly right. I blame people like you. You use your god for good things and then you ask him for forgiveness in the bad. You praise him for babies and beautiful mountains, but ask him for forgiveness for cancer and psychos who go on a killing spree. You have the power to change things for the better, not your imaginary friend. ME blaming GOD for everything is like me pissing my bed at night because I am afraid of a monster under my bed. I don’t believe in monsters, and I don’t believe in your superstitious excuses for why things happen. Religion is a myth, get over it.
pistol pete’s excuse that his god is punishing us is sick on many many different levels. He is saying that god set in motion for this guy to shoot these innocent children, ruining untold amount of lives for reasons they had nothing to do with. pistol pete is saying his god killed these children for our countries decisions… am I the only one here who feels this is insane?
If the statistics (I’m shown here) detailing the number of crimes prevented by privately owned guns every year bears out, it means all around us, daily, this is happening. I literally don’t personally know a single person who has whipped out a gun and prevented some crime.
And why are we going on and on about “mental illness”. We don’t know anything about the guy, far less that he suffered from mental illness. It’s easy to presuppose that anyone who’d do this must be mentally ill, but we don’t know that for a fact about Lanza.
Which advocates posted what conclusion based exclusively or even primarily in rebuttal of a total ban? Which comment?
comment by the highly selective Dave Hicks
For starters, Dave Hicks, each and every post that uses the term “anti” as an intended derogatization, not one of which you’ve ever rebutted as inaccurately overbroad or even counterproductive. You’ve been fine with indiscriminate use of that broad brush, each and every time.
Proliferation matters when it is obesity inducing food…
comment by Sandi
There are gun absolutists who become obese by their twenties, others who smoke themselves into COPD, and continue to think it was only an exercise of “personal liberty” without any cost to others or society generally. Thus they can easily believe that continuing to advocate easier paths to violence is purely about personal freedom without any costs to others in society.
It seriously offends me when the gun apologists tell the rest of us “now isn’t the time” to talk gun regulations. When is the proper time? 24 hours after a massacre? 48 hours? one week? when?
This killing incident happened days after the mall killings in Oregon. Days, not weeks or months. Should we continue to wait to become serious about preventing these violent acts? If I were a parent of a child who had been murdered in a mass killing, whether VA Tech or kindergarten class, I think I would be grateful for those who immediately took up this cause to prevent future carnage…
nosag,
Thanks for your thoughtful response.
1. I think people should have the right to arm themselves.
2. I think there are other societal issues involved in the tragedies of mass shootings we’ve had in the past several years….besides access to guns. I think it involves what’s going on in our minds…and particularly in impressionable minds…and damaged minds. Guns are the instrument, not the cause.
3. The rush to judgement by the libs regarding guns is, well, a rush to judgement. “Rushing” to ANY conclusion is symptomatic of making “hasty” decisions, which we are often schooled to think we shouldn’t do. Well, I guess that excludes the “guns are killers” crowd, doesn’t it?
As evidence, I point to what happened in Washington, DC when gun rights got restricted….vs what happened when they were restored.
nosaj — “Yes, people will choose other methods to injure and kill, but if this assailant in China had used a gun, I suspect there would have been deaths.
With all due respect, you carrying a concealed weapon in the classroom may well cause as much unintended harm as not. Do you think you could shoot an assailant without injuring someone else in your classroom? If you fired three shots, two of which killed the assailant on one of which killed a student, would that be acceptable?”
I’m sorry. I misspoke. I knew better. Still, I expect that if the teacher in China had had a gun, there’d have been a lot fewer injuries. Just because that person didn’t kill anyone, doesn’t mean that killing wasn’t his intention. I’m no more a fan of knives used in an intentionally harmful way than I am of guns. I’d prefer to stop the assailant without getting myself, or my kids, cut to shreds in the process (a golf club or a bat might work). You are right that I could harm a child if I tried to shoot the assailant. I would never, NEVER get over that.(As it is, I worry about hurting their feelings)All of that depends on the circumstances. With warning, inside the classroom, my boys and girls can disappear within seconds. We have practiced!In that case, yes…I think I could shoot an assailant without injury to my children.
I appreciate, Nosaj, that you didn’t make me feel like an idiot. Thank you. I really am trying to be respectful in my posts. I’m appalled by the tone of some of the posts. Obviously, I’ve gotten on Dan’s last nerve and it’s only the second or third time I’ve posted anything! I can’t stress enough that I am NOT one of the gun rights or second amendment advocates. I don’t own a gun and have NEVER owned one. I’m not on either “side”! I’m a worried, hurting teacher, who’s left with very little to protect my students or myself.
hey nosaj,
For some reason i keep mis-spelling your name. I apologize, again, and will get it straight.
If they’re logically consistent, then those who equate guns with cars, and say schools should be saturated with guns, also believe we should eliminate all automobile speed limits in school zones.
hey kristen,
i think your last point about lanza is, well, ill-advised at best.
folks who plan the slaying of close family memebers, followed by a score of innocent children, prior to taking their own life, fall within some definition of mental illness.
i think the road to solving the problem of these mass slayings lies less on the instrument of death, and more on the sick mind and how it is being influenced.
hey justin,
Your last post clearly shows that you know nothing about me.
Re: Ron May @ 6:31 am
Chief among them is how to keep firearms out of the hands of people who are known to have mental health challenges. Our society, over the course of the last several years has begun to defund public programs to house & treat such people. We’ve chosen to close public facilities and reduced or eliminated programs serving many of our most vulnerable people.
—————-
Bingo. There is a idea that both sides should get behind.
I would add to it that the revolving door of the prison system should be chained shut.
As I have said, if you like the results of the war-on-drugs and the results of The Prohibition Era you will love the results of the war-on-guns and the Prohibition of Guns Era.
You ask, “What does Ron’s correct observation that the dismantling of our residential mental facilities and underfunding of nonresidential mental facilities have to do with school violence and that to do with the failed war on drugs?”
As Ron said, “We’ve chosen to close public facilities and reduced or eliminated programs serving many of our most vulnerable people.” To which I would add that we just wait for them to do something and lock them up in an institute that will harden them, increase their violence, and offer little if any help to our most vulnerable people. Into that mix we throw highly vulnerable young folk, (guilty of only personal recreational use) who are the victims of a misguided war-on-drugs — to be given a crash course in how the violent side of the drug culture will feed their addiction, finance a lifestyle, and give the the respect of the dark-side. Having no respect from either side they are sucked into the dark-side of violence. Then because of over crowding and lack of resources to warehouse the longer they are released back onto society — through that revolving door.
Earlier Sandi said that we need to “change the fact that seeking help is stigmatizing” and pointed out that such help is often non-existent. I agree. We as a society do everything we can to discourage troubled folk from having access to / getting help.
The old style highly stigmatized “warehousing” of those vulnerable folk, young and old, was an abomination. It became such a highly visible embarrassment to folk many of the institutions were shut down, by-and-large. Hence, we swept the very real problems under the rug (or living in a box under an overpass or along the railroad tracks, or etc). IMHO it is no better having dumped them out into society until they end up in prison, committing a criminal tragedy, dead, etc.
I have followed mental-health revisions that Virginia made in response to the VT tragedy. Every year, the experts report that there are not enough resources to meet the mandates of the law that was passed to stop the next tragedy of that sort.
So yes, Sandi & Ron. I too think that common-ground could be found and you have put your finger on it — or a least a significant improvement.
But, IMHO both extreme wings will fight it.
Let the gun nuts keep their guns, just outlaw the ammo. Does the constitution say anything about having the right to own ammo or loaded guns, if not there is the solution they can still bare their arms just not fire them.
This whole “God is punishing this country for our sins by killing our innocent children” routine sounds like a Westboro Baptist Church sermon.
There’s no question that our mental health system is as busted as every other aspect of our health system, but at this point the entire discussion of mental health issues isn’t relevant to the topic at hand. There is no reason to believe the shooter was mentally ill, much less exhibited signs of mental illness prior to the shooting. Some cop says he “might have had a personality disorder”. WTF? So the entire conversation devolves to a rant against opening up mental health facilities – the facilities where our shooter never was – and releasing the patients – one of which he never was.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/15/adam-lanza-newtown-school-shooter-honors-student_n_2306736.html?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D246281
It’s not going to be as easy as chalking up this disaster to a lone nutjob “snapping” or whatever the heck I’ve heard people on the news – Mary Bono among them – are trying to sell.
Put a sales tax on ammunition and guns that reflects the real costs to society in security costs, emergency response and medical care. Then levy a fee on gun manufacturers like we’ve done with tobacco to subsidize anti-violence programs and mental health care, which they’ll selfishly pass along to the buyer. What good reason is there to make everyone else subsidize gun fetishists?
Pistol Pete,
When Christ returns, what kind of heat do you suppose he’ll be packing? And will he favor concealed over open carry? Do you think he’s an assault weapons kind of guy? You seem to be an authority on all things biblical and fire arm related so perhaps you can enlighten me.
Police: Gunman wounds 3 at Alabama hospital
Saturday’s latest headline:
“Police: Gunman wounds 3 at Alabama hospital”
Three people were wounded before a security guard (the only one for whom it makes sense to have a gun in a hospital) killed the shooter. Of course many gun apologists will try to spin this as if it wasn’t a gun that started the violence in the first place. That would be a travesty of a more honestly accurate conclusion: that rather than being an example of how guns saved any lives and nothing else, it’s an example of how guns caused the wounding of three people before necessitating an action no security guard should want to be forced to take.
Now let’s hear from the VCDL types how the Montgomery Co. hospital security guard and police officers killed in recent years were, like the schoolchildren in Connecticut, part of the “victim pool”, in the selfishly callous phrase often used by VCDL recruiter John Wilburn.
With all the paranoid talk by gun fetishists about Obama magically taking away 300 million legal guns, and the subsequent runups in ammo and gun prices, they probably still won’t ascribe any increase in prices after the latest exercises of NRA enabled madness to anything having to do with guns or how they’ve been used. Instead it’ll still be the “gun control” boogieman.
Kristen-
“Anyone who thinks that the GOP could take both houses and the WH over guns hasn’t been paying attention to the GOP.”
There’s a saying in sports about bad teams: they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The Republicans have dug themselves into a pit. Even an attempt at draconian gun legislation would be like throwing them a rope.
“I’m also not sure why we should give up on a substantial, if not total, ban or limitation on the types and number of firearms that a single private citizen can own,”
What does the number of guns someone owns have to do with anything? What would it have done to prevent what happened yesterday? He only used two guns (assuming current reports are accurate). As for the types of guns, again, no one here can explain why a black rifle that looks scary and shoots a .223 round should be banned while a wood stocked rifle that shoots a .223 round shouldn’t.
“in addition to reasonable registration and licensure procedures.”
How would this have helped yesterday? Registration is a no-go politically.
“There is only one thing we know for sure, and that’s that the “system” – or lack of system- we have currently is a failure.”
Whatever we are doing now has resulted in gun murders dropping by more than a third. That’s five thousand deaths per year eliminated.
“And as an opponent of unregulated armory ownership, its not my problem to fix. IMO it’s up to the gun people to solve this problem, because theyve authored it.”
Is anyone here in favor of unlimited ownership? Honestly, I don’t recall anyone saying that, but I’d be happy to be corrected. And again, if you want to let gun people “fix” the problem, fine. We’ll leave things the way they are and watch crime continue its fall. We didn’t author the problem, our political system and apathy from the public did it.
“I’m not interested in hearing how “guns are our heritage” ” we have a gun-culture here” “guns built this country” or other mindless platitudes.”
You might as well have said, “I’m not interested in digging into the complex issues surrounding guns and crime so that we can come up with an effective solution.”
Frank-
“I’d suggest a careful, thoughtful review of computer and video games….which are desensitizing generations of our kids to horrifying concepts of killing.”
Video games in their current violent and graphic form have paralleled the drop in crime I always reference. There is no evidence of a causal relationship between the two. Also, many countries with far less violent crime play the same games and watch the same movies.
“Yeah, I know, that would trample on first amendment rights…”
Yes it would, and I treasure the first amendment as much as the second.
nosaj-
“I would only add to this list background checks at gun shows anda reduction in magazine capacity.”
I wouldn’t fuss about closing the private sales “loophole”, but it is going to be a daunting task logistically.
“However, I part ways with your analysis on two points.
If you base your right to own a firearm on the 2nd Amendment, then you are essentially saying that you need a firearm to protect yourself from threats and to maintain a militia. Allowing for some small variation in what individuals will identify as “need,” I fail to see why any individual would need more than five firearms.”
I’ve addressed this before, but there are only so many guns that someone can carry or use. The idiot yesterday used only two guns, which means your suggestion would have had no effect. I own five guns despite only ever having bought or used one of them. I inherited four that I’ve never fired. You have to understand that guns are an interest for millions of people, not unlike many other hobbies. Hell, I’m a Star Wars nerd, I’ve got more replica light sabers than guns. Setting an arbitrary, and in your case, extremely low limitation on ownership doesn’t prevent anything. The vast vast majority of gun murders aren’t committed by gun collectors or someone who even owns more than one.
“I think we can reduce the shear numbers of guns by reducing the need factor, and this might be a step toward reducing the glamour surrounding gun possession in our current culture. I continue to think more guns equals more gun deaths, and reducing the number of guns will reduce the number of deaths.”
You then have to explain how gun crime has plummeted in the last two decades while gun laws loosened and gun sales soared.
“With about 20,000 murders a year in the US,”
Have to stop you here. We are now under 10,000 gun murders per year. Not to long ago, it was 15,000.
“a 5% reduction would result in saving 1,000 lives.”
After we cut your number in half to reflect the actual number of gun murders, we then have to understand that it wouldn’t be 5%. Remember, the 5% number is ALL LONG GUNS. That’s plain old shotguns, hunting rifles, AND so called assault weapons. So the number would be much lower than 500 and that’s without taking into account how many successful defensive uses would be eliminated (no idea how many, but it’s more than zero).
“I think we can work on the definition of “assault weapon” to prevent traditional hunting weapons from being declared illegal, but saving 1,000 lives is persuasuve.”
But what the antis call assault weapons are already used for hunting and in competition. I can’t repeat it enough, these guns aren’t more deadly than “traditional” hunting weapons. They look mean, that’s all.
“You have carved out a very reasonable place to begin this discussion! Thank you.”
It can be done! Thank you for your thoughtful and calm response.
Shrillary-
“You claim, in your post, that I was “nit picking” to demonstrate the FACT that at the time of the writing of the 2nd Amendment, there were none of the weapons available today.”
No no no, you weren’t the one nit picking *I* was. I was just pointing out that it didn’t take minutes to reload. That’s all.
“And no, I do not for one minute believe Jefferson or Franklin could look into the future and see the mass slaughter of fellow Americans using today’s weapons.”
That wasn’t the issue. And it would be less than 50 years from their deaths when the first practical repeating arms came out.
“Had they had an inkling, the 2nd Amendment would look very different, if it existed at all.”
It’s pure speculation on our part. But given how much MORE militant they were about the people being armed enough to resist government tyranny, they might have advocated for allowing more military weapons in civilian hands.
“You gave your list of some solutions, however, why isn’t background checks at gun shows on your list?”
They already do background checks at gun shows. There is no gun show loophole. The loophole, if there is one, has to do with private sales. The majority of people selling guns at gun shows have Federal Firearm Licenses and must run every sale through the NICS system, just like they were in a gun store. Those who don’t and aren’t selling guns for a living do not. If we limited the checks to inside the gun show, they could walk outside to the parking lot and make the sale legally.
I pointed out earlier in this post that though I believe it will be a logistical nightmare, I’ve got no problem with requiring all sales to go through NICS. I don’t think it will have much effect on violent crime and wouldn’t have prevented what happened yesterday, but I think it makes sense if handled correctly.
“Also, are you saying that because it may be difficult to track the mentally ill we shouldn’t attempt to do so?”
That’s not at all what I said.
“Is doing nothing better than something because it may have a “chilling” effect?”
It could be if it causes people to reject treatment.
“Although I know you are no fan of the NRA,the fact is that the NRA has spent billions in conjunction with gun and ammo manufacturers to convince the populace to associate
guns = safety. Why are NRA members not as outraged as most of the population when these murderous acts are committed with guns that can mow down 20 kindergarteners? Why won’t their membership put pressure on the NRA to in fact, act on some of the suggestions like the ones you’ve enumerated?”
I’m not going to speak for the NRA except to say that I’m sure the bulk of their membership was as horrified by what happened as we are. They just disagree with what the problem actually is.
“Why should we as a nation not feel compelled to provide both an increased funding for mental health and common sense gun regulations?”
We shouldn’t. But as I’ve tried (and obviously failed) to show, almost all of the proposed “sensible” regulations would be ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst.
“Why should we simply accept your premise that we are a more violent society – and then not address it because it may be politically toxic or expensive.”
That’s not my premise, that’s a statement of fact. Of course we should try to reduce it, again, it’s the how that is the stickler. Expense matters when you have both parties willing to chop social spending and one of them with a fanatical zeal to do so.
“Again, is doing nothing better than a measured approach to do what needs to be done?”
I’ve never said we shouldn’t do anything. I want to do things that work and don’t penalize the 99.9999% of gun owners who will never shoot anyone. But “doing nothing”, that is loosening gun laws over the last twenty years had coincided with a massive drop in gun murders. If we locked the gun murder numbers where they were, around 15,000/year and let the counter roll for twenty years, we have seen a total savings of tens of thousands, probably over 50,000 fewer people murdered with guns.
Warren-
“And I admire that you’re able to tell that calling anyone who’s not a gun absolutist (itself a type of 2A hypocrisy) an “anti” is both inaccurate and counter-productive”
I have to confess to using “anti” to describe the gun control side. But it’s not because I think they are all extremists, but because it’s easier to type, “anti” than it is to type, “people who are in favor of gun control measures that I don’t think would work.”
“Jason, anecdotes are not the plural of data.”
I wasn’t attempting to produce data in any scientific manner. I merely presented examples of “upside”, that’s all. And the number of positive uses of guns is not “dozens” per year, it’s at least 100,000. And that’s if we believe the figure that gun control people use.
Kristen-
“If the statistics (I’m shown here) detailing the number of crimes prevented by privately owned guns every year bears out, it means all around us, daily, this is happening. I literally don’t personally know a single person who has whipped out a gun and prevented some crime.”
At least 100,000 times a year. That number is accepted by the gun control groups. And seriously, because you don’t know any means it doesn’t happen? I don’t know anyone who has AIDS or is HIV positive or who died in both Gulf Wars or….
of course the news casters are falling over one another to give the american people “breaking news”…..from the beginning each one has reported something sensational that turns out to be untrue….and the so called experts dont have a clue….only speculation…..the trend is to find someone else to blame besides this….troubled youth….the seller of the weapons……the mother…..the father…..the innocent brother shown being led away in handcuffs….surely someone else is to blame…..anyone but the animal that pulled the trigger
On and on we go, responding to things not said, accusations not leveled and ignoring the truth. Par for this course.
Since so many people did not read this the first time, I will repeat. But none of that matters now. What matters is that we fix the problem that is still causing people to “lose it” and take as many people, or children out with them as they can. I will not blame “mental illness” either, because I believe evil exists and has its own twisted reasoning that those without that bent cannot fully fathom. Serial killers and mass gunmen are quite often disturbed but it goes beyond mere mental illness. The logistics and activity involved goes beyond anyone in a psychotic state IMO. We have got to get past the idea that “big brother” is the bad guy for knowing anything about you and change the fact that seeking help is stigmatizing and often non-existent. We have big fish to fry here and it would be a blessing if the gun advocates could work WITH us to figure this out, instead of whining that we are after their guns.
Many of you have already proven you want to be one dimensional, and that is your choice.
There is no possibility of banning guns. Not hand guns, not long guns, not machine/automatic guns, not grenades, not bombs, and most assuredly not what is already in unknown hands in unknown quantities. That is a fact we all need to face. We also need to face that even if we did ban them altogether, like we do drugs, drunk driving, assault, robbery, vandalism and any other thing or activity, it will not stop this from happening.
The shooters in these situations go against everything in our human moral fiber. They chose to give in to whatever demons drive them and the only question involved is how far they will get with whatever decision they have made.
Could we PLEASE do away with the idiocy of comparing accidents to deliberate murders? There is no comparison. Can we stop talking about what gun control of too many guns would ever work? The answer is none. The gun advocates know this, which is why they just sit back and refute whatever you say with reality. We can come to grips with what can be done or we can keep on talking at each other instead of to each other.
You will either choose to be part of the solution, or part of the problem.
The reason to bring up mental health issues in the mass murders that continue to occur is because it almost always is a factor. From VA Tech to the shooting of Gabby Giffords and the people around her the shooter had some type of mental problem.
The common thread is usually:
“The mass murder motive on the other hand is very different. While they have their own perceived reasons for killing these rarely make logical sense. As for demographics, the mass murderer is typically a white male, a loner, has a college degree or some college, from a relatively stable background and from an upper-middle to middle class family. They often aspire to more than they can handle, then form a hatred and blame others if they fail. Also, they are much more likely to suffer from a mental illness, specifically some type of psychosis.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/reading-between-the-headlines/201207/mass-murders-are-the-rise
If we don’t look at the mental health issues that encompass mass shootings; if we don’t recognize some of the warning signs, and if we don’t fund community mental health centers or school psychologists, then we must resign ourselves that this will become something more than a rare event – a two pronged attack – gun regulations and mental health funding, should at least begin to be part of the discussion.
Re: Warren @ 12:52 pm
My “Someone is in denial, and it is not me” was addressed to a blogger who was asserting that no one in the Pro-more-restrictions-on-the-RKBA crowd was or had proposing a total ban — no more, no less. Even Dan has shown that was wrong bu posting and linking to one such call for a total ban.
Warren, If you believe that the death of someone you know has no more impact on you than does the death of someone you read about in the paper, I pity you. You might want to seek some professional help, if you really believe that the emotion and empathy of folk in the Roanoke Valley and NRV as a result of this recent tragedy is the same as it would be were it to have happened here, happened in their respective neighborhood, happened at their child’s school, etc. IMHO, yes NIMBY is real and not always a pejorative.
———-
Comment by Warren @ 12:58 pm
Warren, grow up. That is not the way a debate works.
I readily acknowledge that there are some folk who support the RKBA who also think things that I don’t think and who make arguments that I would neither make nor agree with. I don’t call them out in public any more than Dan disputes calls for total firearm bans (which until recently he had denied supporting), bans on ammunition, using the terms such as “gun-nut”, casting aspersions on someone’s masculinity, etc. BTW, neither do you or most of the rest of Pro-more-restrictions-on-the-RKBA crowd call out every argument put forward by other members of the Pro-more-restrictions-on-the-RKBA crowd with which you are not in total agreement. Why do you (plural you) not dispute that, which is put forward by Pro-more-restrictions-on-the-RKBA crowd, and which any one of you feel is unworkable, too little, to much, forward, which is inaccurately over-broad or even counterproductive? After all what’s good for the goose….
FWIIW, I don’t even call out every derogatory term made by a Pro-more-restrictions-on-the-RKBA blogger.
So, what’s you gripe?
BTW, this comment is not a Tu Quoque reply — as I am not saying the two wrongs make a right. I do not think it is the duty of folk to call to task every dubious / questionable argument put forward on either side of a debate. Hence IMHO there is not the first wrong to be justified by citing the second.
OTOH, you have a lot of catching up to do, guy — if you do believe it to be the duty to call to task every dubious / questionable / inaccurately over-broad / counterproductive argument.
.
.
Dave Hicks, you have chosen to pretend my point in post #76 December 14, 2012 @ 6:02 pm was that no one on earth had called for banning guns. I clearly did not mean that, nor am I dumb enough to say it. I cleared that up in my next paragraph, even if you did think so: “NO ONE believes getting rid of guns is the answer and I do not think anyone has called for that. Not the Roanoke Times, not Dan and not me”.
Yet you conveniently ignore that to pretend I was not being realistic. You also chose to ignore most of everything else I said. That is characteristic of you and part of the problem I have with any conversation with you.
It is most assuredly not just the “antis” that are part of the problem.
Fellow bloggers, I’m going to make a suggestion that may not go down very well. As I think we all have experienced, the last 36 hours have been very difficult to comprehend. To be honest, I thought I was past what happened at Virginia Tech in 2007. Yesterday I learned that I was not. Neither was my wife nor was our youngest son who was a student at Tech in 2007. Though he was never in danger at that time, he lost a friend during the tragedy. He and I talked three times yesterday and he eventually left work early. I spent over an hour in the chapel on campus yesterday trying to get a hold on my feelings. Given what little impact the VT events had on me and my family, I cannot come close to imagining what the families of those who were killed yesterday are going through.
I plan to take a break from commenting about what happened in Connecticut for now. I don’t have any answers as to what steps should be taken now so I think it’s best to just be quiet for now. I know we need to have a national discussion about the many issues wrapped up in these kinds of events. I know we will. It will not likely be pretty. It’s not just about guns. It’s also about violence and dealing with people who have challenging emotional challenges. Just like we need to fix our financial problems we have to come up with solutions to these other issues.
God bless each of you.
RCH, welcome to Dan’s blog. It can get a bit testy here, but it is most often worth it. The discussions can be lively and educational, so I hope you will stick around.
I totally understand your fears. On this day after, emotions are raw – and they should be. Anger, frustration, helplessness, hope will help us work through this tragedy. I also work in public education, and it sometimes feels like we are so out in the open, without protection. Perhaps our respective school divisions will take this opportunity review safety protocols and address concerns.
Long after your students have moved on, they will remember you not so much for what you taught them but for how you made them feel. Go to school tomorrow and take care of your kids. They will need you.
Re: Kristen @ 3:24 pm
When you quit trying to blame the tool, you might start looking at the misuse of the tool and how to fix what was / is wrong with the person doing the harm through that misuse.
Mixing metaphors (actually mixing tool metaphors, for that matter), when the only tool you have is a hammer all problems begin to look like nails. OIOW, if you focus soley on the tool your view of the true task becomes distorted.
Might there not be mental health issues that should be addressed? Do you really believe that all the intentionally committed, non accidental tragedies, large and small, are the normal actions of normal rational folk?
Might not our cultural entertainment need to be reexamined. I mean seriously reexamined. I read a paper, some time ago, that suggested that even apparently benign shows (e.g., Dora the Explorer) cause young children to invest the video screen with authority. Even more years back I saw a study of the disconnect between the real world and the world shown on TV. Most homes have multiple televisions.
http://tinyurl.com/2vkdag
**
SNIP
The average American, according spends an average of more than four hours a day watching TV.
SNIP
II CHILDREN
Approximate number of studies examining TV’s effects on children: 4,000
Number of minutes per week that parents spend in meaningful conversation with their children: 3.5
Number of minutes per week that the average child watches television: 1,680
Percentage of day care centers that use TV during a typical day: 70
Percentage of parents who would like to limit their children’s TV watching: 73
Percentage of 4-6 year-olds who, when asked to choose between watching TV and spending time with their fathers, preferred television: 54
Hours per year the average American youth spends in school: 900 hours
Hours per year the average American youth watches television: 1500
III VIOLENCE
Number of murders seen on TV by the time an average child finishes elementary school: 8,000
Number of violent acts seen on TV by age 18: 200,000
Percentage of Americans who believe TV violence helps precipitate real life mayhem: 79
SNIP
The average child will watch 8,000 murders on TV before finishing elementary school. By age eighteen, the average American has seen 200,000 acts of violence on TV, including 40,000 murders. At a meeting in Nashville, TN last July, Dr. John Nelson of the American Medical Association (an endorser of National TV-Turnoff Week) said that if 2,888 out of 3,000 studies show that TV violence is a casual factor in real-life mayhem, “it’s a public health problem.” The American Psychiatric Association addressed this problem in its endorsement of National TV-Turnoff Week, stating, “We have had a long-standing concern with the impact of television on behavior, especially among children.”
Millions of Americans are so hooked on television that they fit the criteria for substance abuse as defined in the official psychiatric manual, according to Rutgers University psychologist and TV-Free America board member Robert Kubey.
[emphasis added]
SNIP
**
So, IMHO, what’s on television exerts powerful influences on the lives of Americans. Maybe more powerful than we are willing to acknowledge. IMHO it seriously distorts folks view of the world.
Maybe, just maybe it is, also, time for the responsible press / media to step up to the plate of accepting responsibility. NO, I am NOT talking about Governmental censorship. I am suggesting voluntarily reducing the extensive coverage — which might just might produce copy-cat tragedies.
As Pogo said. “We have seen the enemy…..”
Dave Hicks, I am good with having a serious discussion about the declining state of mental health care in relation to this tragedy. You make some very good points. However, the escalating culture of gun violence has to be a parallel discussion.
Not sure what you mean by locking the gates of thr revolving door prison system. Are you advocating longer sentences for certain crimes? If so, which crimes? In my view, we incarcerate far too many folks, especially people with treatable mental health issues, which I think you noted.
We are off to a rocky start with this discussion, but a start it is!
hey dan,
regarding your post today at 10:10 this a.m.,
…I NEVER said to ban ANYTHING. I suggested that we undertake a “careful and thoughtful review…”.
I realize that my words don’t comport with your bias toward just about everything I say, but, that’s your problem, not mine…. you silly opinion columnist!
Dave Hicks, I neglected to answer a question you posed earlier. I support background checks for all purchases made at legal gun shops and gun shows. You asked what impact that would have had on this tragedy, and the clear answer is none. I believe the shoot may have tried to purchase a gun a few days ago, but was turned away because he wouldn’t submit to the background check and the waiting period. The law worked the way it should, but this young man unfortunately had access to other weapons.
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 7:25 pm
I never said that Roanoke Times, Dan, or you had said that.
However, your unqualified standalone sentence, “NO ONE believes getting rid of guns is the answer and I do not think anyone has called for that [note the caps, btw] is and was all that I was addressing. (Albeit I do now question Dan about the “perspective”, which he posted. In light of nosaj’s valid presumption that I agreed with the solutions for which I posted the links. Can we make a valid presumption about Dan’s posting the link to “Forget the assault weapons ban, it’s time to ban guns completely”?)
To pretend that an all out ban is not on the minds of gun owners and the proceed on a assumption that it is not on the agenda of some of your cohorts in the pro-more-restrictions crowd is not going to be productive.
Stand strongly and convincingly against a total ban and you might increase your creditability with those protecting 2A.
I think the “Entertainment” industry bears some of the blame for the epidemic of mass murders. In response to the tragedy in Connecticut, Fox had to postpone new episodes of Family Guy and American Dad. Meanwhile, Syfy is pulling an episode of Haven and Paramount pictures postponed a red carpet celebrity premier of its new film Jack Reacher.
Even Star Wars says its okay to kill little children, because we already know that Darth Vadar winds up okay at the end, right? Here’s a 18 second reminder of George Lucas’ shameful video turd (that at least 100 million young men have watched). Note this clip stops before showing all the dead children, un-like the movie itself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-T_X_fHu7Y
Comment by Dave Hicks — December 15, 2012 @ 8:37 pm. I agree Dave. Our “pass time” activities, which include enormous amounts of simulated violence, are part of the problem.
Excuse me Dave Hicks, but let’s do get this one thing very, very straight, I am not looking to “increase [my] creditability with those protecting 2A“! Far, far from it. It would behoove “those protecting 2A” to see the writing on the walls that the blood of those six year-olds have left though. As I have tried many times to tell you, any restrictions that come or gun control efforts you chafe under will be self-inflicted for all the time you all see only one side of the issue.
AND Dave Hicks, for the record, I did not make any “unqualified standalone sentence”! You pulled the comment out of context and the point I was making for your own purposes. My post made clear I was not calling for any ban and neither had anyone else here done so to that point, and yet several of the gun advocates had alluded to that being the gist of the conversation. Dishonesty does not help the discussion and I will not stand for it.
Dave Gresham-
Please stick with whatever line of work you are already in rather than attempt to be a film critic. Vader killing the children is in no way portrayed as ok because things turned out in the end. The killing of the children is the final, ultimate proof of his turning to the dark side, to evil.
When you say that everything turns out okay, I assume you are referring to him redeeming himself through self sacrifice in Ep. 6. This is a point of contention among Star Wars fans. Can a true mass murderer and torturer redeem himself? Ironically, if you subscribe to a Christian, particularly Catholic point of view, the answer is definitely yes. I’m not comfortable with that myself, but it’s far from the only problem I have with how Lucas wrote the story.
Regardless of the holes that Lucas’ poor writing left, there is nothing that even hints that killing the kids was ok since he later “atoned” for it.
Re: Nosaj @ 8:38 pm
Not sure what you mean by locking the gates of thr revolving door prison system.
—————-
I did a poor job of explaining that.
Albeit, I’ll admit up front it has nothing to do with this tragedy (which is likely why I passed over it, lightly). However, I’m talking about the out-of-hand recidivism rate for violent criminals. I threw it in because it is one of the things that I feel we really need to talk about, along with better mental health treatment / facilities / funding.
Time-after-time the newspapers report a laundry list of earlier violent criminal convictions for newly convicted killers, rapist, etc.
From from the Pew institute DOJ, et al — see: http://tinyurl.com/blzhngp
—–
“Fifty-two percent of the offenders were returned to prison for “serious” crimes and technical violations (they didn’t follow the rules of their release after prison).”
—–
“States spend $50 billion a year on corrections, yet more than four out of ten prisoners wind up back behind bars within three years of release.”
—–
“Post-prison recidivism was strongly related to arrest history.
Among prisoners with one arrest prior to their release, 41 percent were rearrested. Of those with two prior arrests, 47 percent were rearrested. Of those with three earlier arrests, 55 percent were rearrested. Among those with more than 15 prior arrests, that is about 18 percent of all released prisoners, 82 percent were rearrested within the three-year period.”
“Re: My last.
On the earlier thread, I posted a link to a professional LEO comment about arming teachers, et al and @ 11:34 pm Dan ridiculed it with “And THAT’S what makes his post so ridiculous.”
–Comment by Dave Hicks
Dave Hicks,
It was never my intention to ridicule your comment. It was absolutely my intention to ridicule what you linked to. That was a ridiculous, and I believe that you will agree with me once you’ve given it a little thought.
Ridiculous in your opinion Casey, as is everything that is not your view. Especially on the gun topic. Its still hard for me to believe that when or if an armed citizen was to save your life or the life of another innocent, that you would still find some reasoning as to why that law abiding person is just another nut with a gun.
DaveHicks, so we’re not supposed to assess gun policy but rather address the entertainment industry? I don’t get that.
Dave Hicks, tackling the problem of recidivism is quite daunting. Consider that it costs about $45,000/year to incarcerate a criminal, as opposed to about $22,000/year for community corrections. Consider also that most criminals come from low socio-economic backgrounds and have little education. We cannot incarcerate people indefinitely, so they will be released. My experience tells me the recidivists have poor community support (family and employment) and return to what they know – crime.
You are so right about incarcerating folks with mental health issues instead of or as a means of getting them treatment. A local, state, or federal prison is not a great place to get meaningful psychological/psychiatric treatment. The penal institutions provide what they can, but as you might expect, that is not really what they do. In the area of sex offender treatment, there is some very good work in the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
My first job some 30 years ago was as a mental health worker at a local psychiatric hospital. I was assigned to the adolescent and children wing of the hospital. Kids came to us from all races, genders, and socio-economic backgrounds. Some were mildly depressed, others seriously psychotic, and most anything in between. I saw real mental illness, and trust me on this, it is challenging. The average stay for these kids in 1982 was around 90 days, some shorter, many longer. I am guessing that the average stay for most adolescents now is about 8 days. Insurance won’t cover longer stays. So, you are right on the money. We need to have the political will to look hard at mental illness and put adequate funding into whatever needs to be done.
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/12/15/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother
Heartbreaking. I wish Adam’s mother had locked up her guns. Well, maybe she did. He could have gotten the key/combo. I’m wondering how this will be addressed at school tomorrow. I think I’ll show “the Grinch”.
i watched the President speak in Newtown……i thought he showed compassion….concern…..and true grief…..in his talk he indicated that he would try to do something to change the trend of violence that permeates our society…..not once did he mention guns…..yet every news station came on after the speech and said…..the president is going to use his power to enforce gun control……he did not….there is more of a problem in this tragedy than guns…..not enough money for school guards….not enough money for better protection to keep animals like this shooter from entering a school….part of the problem is the news pundits themselves…..instead of reporting the news accurately….it seems they try to shape the news to their view….such a shame
Re: Kristen @ 9:58 am
That is a false dilemma, false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black-and/or-white thinking, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, or what ever you want to call it. There are more options available. I was just suggesting one more for consideration.
What I have been objecting to is the single focus on firearms, by many bloggers. IMHO, all options should be on the table.
If we trust our kids to teachers and school administrators, why don’t we trust those very same teachers and school administrators (those who are willing, BTW) with firearms to protect those kids? Don’t teachers and school administrators have the background checks that the more-restriction-on-the-RKBA crowd champions as a cure-all for purchasing a firearm?
As I asked before, if we protect judges with armed guards and metal-detectors, why not kids? We protect money shipments with armed guards. Why not kids? Do either of those examples say something about the loci of power and the value we place on things and people?
The ban on the so-called assault weapons didn’t work then and won’t work now. FWIIW, virtually all mass murders in the past 20 years have occurred in alleged gun-free zones. One measure of insanity is repeating the same failure and hoping that the next time the failure will turn out to be a success. IMHO, Gun-free zones are a lethal insanity.
As to the role of the media, why aren’t they dissecting what went right in two other cases in the past few days
One that Kristen, herself, posted @ 3:44 pm on http://tinyurl.com/ccbzejd from Indiana.
The other in Oklahoma — see: http://tinyurl.com/d9j8bw7
Or, for that matter, the one in Dan’s old stomping grounds back in July — see http://tinyurl.com/ccj2ek2
I throw out these links to success stories for two reasons. One, so as not to suggest a false dichotomy, myself. Two, because I believe that looking at successes might offer more useful information that focusing on and repeating failures.
DaveHicks, the reason the press is concentrating on Newtown is that that’s what people are interested in right now. Little trumps 18 dead 6 year olds.
When you say that everything is on the table, what do you mean by everything? You’re open to some restrictions on gun ownership?
“If we trust our kids to teachers and school administrators, why don’t we trust those very same teachers and school administrators (those who are willing, BTW) with firearms to protect those kids? Don’t teachers and school administrators have the background checks that the more-restriction-on-the-RKBA crowd champions as a cure-all for purchasing a firearm?
As I asked before, if we protect judges with armed guards and metal-detectors, why not kids? We protect money shipments with armed guards. Why not kids? Do either of those examples say something about the loci of power and the value we place on things and people?”
Indeed! And each entrance to every mall should have an armed guard. Plus each 3 acres of public parkland. Each theater in a multiplex should have one, and every church should, too, for each service. They’re also needed in civic centers, stadiums, bus stations, on trains and in every supermarket, department store and mall parking lot. And in every college classroom.
Apparently, the latest gun craze in Newton, Conn. has been firing upon exploding targets at makeshift gun ranges. And the people have been getting fed up.
“Apparently, the latest gun craze in Newton, Conn.”
I don’t understand. I’ve been assure that this happened in an area with extremely strict gun laws and that this was an excellent example of how stricter gun laws don’t work. But from the looks of this article, gun ownership and use was pretty damn wide open in Newtown.
Which is it gun folks?
Apparently, this whole gun control argument is an attempt to limit how badly mentally-ill people and criminals can hurt us.
gdad:
“Which is it gun folks?”
You know the answer, gdad. They may allow hunting rifles which are plenty useful for detonating Tannerite, but make handgun carry difficult or impossible for the lawful. Connecticut is “May Issue” for the select few and, yes, it is a class D felony there for a CHP holder to carry on school property. Wouldn’t want any of those who respect the law to be around.
Now let me ask you something. If guns being everywhere is the problem, why did the school immediately call on the police to bring their guns when the school had a problem? I suspect that you aren’t anti gun; you’re anti ME having a gun.
John Wilburn,
Well said.
“why did the school immediately call on the police to bring their guns when the school had a problem?”
Let’s face it, John W, that is just a really, really stupid question with a more than obvious answer. Why do you lower yourself by posing it?
I keep hearing some pro-gun folks saying:
1. “You see what happens in these gun-free zones?!!” and “If only those teachers were armed, or if the principal had an assault weapon, this never would have happened!”
I don’t buy it and here’s why.
First, there is no way you’re ever going to get every teacher in the country to pack a weapon. Second, as Justin True has pointed out, if it ever happened, at some time and at some place some kid is going to get one of those guns and use it to a very bad effect.
But above ALL ELSE, these arguments by the gunners appear depend on a sort of rationality and reasoning that you cannot — and SHOULD NOT — ascribed to madmen like the guy who shot up Sandy Hook, or Virginia Tech, or the Sikh Temple, or the Aurora movie theater. Their actions are fundamentally irrational. For that reason the notion they might be deterred if their victims were armed is irrational all by itself.
gdad:
“Let’s face it, John W, that is just a really, really stupid question with a more than obvious answer. Why do you lower yourself by posing it?”
Ask a stupid question….
“…which are plenty useful for detonating Tannerite,”
And the purpose of “detonating Tannerite” is what.
Re: Dan Casey @ 12:50 am
Be careful of that slippery slope, Dan.
—–
Re: Dan Casey @ 1:44 pm
So, what do you propose, Dan.
Are you still holding to your earlier statements that you only support…? What have you maintained was your agenda? Only, no concealed carry in restaurants, hands-on-training to be sure folk can hi what they shoot at, …? What else?
Dan embellishing things:
“If only those teachers were armed, or if the principal had an assault weapon”
All the principle needs is a Glock 27 in a pocket holser. Don’t be silly.
“First, there is no way you’re ever going to get every teacher in the country to pack a weapon.”
If we can promote normal responsible carry and break down the taboo and peer pressure, it might surprise you just how many would.
“Second, as Justin True has pointed out, if it ever happened, at some time and at some place some kid is going to get one of those guns and use it to a very bad effect.”
I’d be far more worried about the unsecured kitchen knives, honestly.
“For that reason the notion they might be deterred if their victims were armed is irrational all by itself.”
In any event, Dan doesn’t want teachers to be prepared. He would rather just light another candle and talk about the next one.
Kristen:
“And the purpose of “detonating Tannerite” is what.”
Stump removal. It’s just a lot of fun. Relax.
.
Re: Kristen @ 10:46 pm
Yup. Gore, death, and destruction sell more games, movie tickets, TV ads, also. Think about it. We have seen the enemy and….
Re: the table: there is no question that the pro-more-restrictions-on-the-RKBA is on the table. What I am asking is where is the rest of the options.
Before someone claims that I am proposing censorship, I am not. I don’t think goverment restrictions are the answer. I am a small “l” libertarian, remember. Just as I support responsible legal exercise of 2A, I call for responsible legal exercise of 1A. Folk get what they want, what they are willing to pay for. As long as folk will pay for irresponsible “entertainment” and revel in gore, death, and destruction, irresponsible vendors will sell it to them — openly or on a black market.
DaveHicks, no one ever killed someone by watching a movie or playing a game. I don’t think this is a censorship issue. I think it’s a non-correlative relationship issue. If I call for closer gun restrictions, it does not have to follow that I’d also demand limits on what can be in a movie or video game, which are both already scrutinized and subject to age limitations and content advisories.
Dave Hicks, I do not doubt that violent video games and violent movies and violent music and violent online forums might make a mentally unstable person act out a fantasy or their hate, but millions of kids and adults play those games, watch those movies and listen to that music and never do anything remotely violent or offensive in real life. Same for the claims of religious need. Millions of atheists and agnostics exist and do not go off and become violent or offensive to anyone.
What video game, music or movie did Ed Gein, Howard Unruh, Charles Starkweather, Hitler, Idi Amin and a myriad of other serial killers and mass murderers watch or listen too?
I would love to see violent imagery banned and certainly not allowed for anyone under 18, but that is not the cause for these tragedies. Remember when we had this conversation after the Tucson shooting of Gabby Giffords among others? Violent imagery, even in political talk was no excuse then and it is no excuse now.
I can support the rationale for a ban on assault weapons, large magazines and “polar bear” hand guns (with a caveat for permitted ownership). I can support laws against guns being within access for the mentally ill, even if that means more of them must be “adjudicated” as such. I do not support trying the impossible of banning guns or blaming guns alone for any tragedy.
Dave Hicks asks, “where is the rest of the options”? Well, gun control is not nearly as costly as mental health screenings, adjudications and help. You tell us why it is not front and center? No one can deny that it is not the root cause of someone trying to use a gun for such heinous activity.
“Ask a stupid question….”
And get an appropriately disdainful reply.
Sandi Saunders:
“and “polar bear” hand guns (with a caveat for permitted ownership).”
So what anti-gun piece of literature did you get that new term off of? My Glock is sold for self defense and can be used for bear hunting. Glock even markets the 10mm that way and sells longer barrels for it. Please explain what a “polar bear” gun is and how “polar bear” guns are a widespread problem. Or, is this just another solution in search of a problem? I’m guessing the latter.
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 2:49 pm
Dave Hicks, I do not doubt that violent video games and violent movies and violent music and violent online forums might make a mentally unstable person act out a fantasy or their hate, but millions of kids and adults play those games, watch those movies and listen to that music and never do anything remotely violent or offensive in real life.
—————–
Yup.
Millions of folk have carry permits and far more own firearms and never do anything remotely violent or offensive in real life.
Think about it.
Which is why I have no advocated for disarming those people Dave Hicks.
Sorry, that should read “not advocated”.
Sandi Saunders:
“Which is why I have no advocated for disarming those people Dave Hicks.”
Then why do you have a problem with us carrying in post offices, airports, K-12s, college campuses, etc.? Do you want the law to do your dirty work for you?
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 2:51 pm
No one can deny that it is not the root cause of someone trying to use a gun for such heinous activity.
——————
Hum?
Millions own and carry firearms. The overwhelmingly vast majority never do anything heinous. In fact, some actually save lives.
OTOH, folk in need of mental health screenings, adjudications and very expensive help often do heinous activity.
Now, let’s see?
Is there a cause and effect suggested by those facts?
What is the underlying root cause?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-harold-koplewicz/adam-lanza-mental-_b_2311778.html?utm_hp_ref=health-news&ir=Health%20News
There is no indication as of yet that Lanza had been suffering from mental illness. We need to fix our mental health care system anyway, but not just to prevent incidents like this one.
The NRA took down its FB page over the weekend, for real? What a bunch of gutless wonders. Watch then run from the results of their own handiwork.
You know Dave Hicks, if you parsed John Wilburn’s posts the way you do mine, you might have some credibility in this discussion.
Why can’t you leave my point in context and then quote it? “gun control is not nearly as costly as mental health screenings, adjudications and help. You tell us why it is not front and center? No one can deny that it is not the root cause of someone trying to use a gun for such heinous activity.”
Do you think these people are NOT mentally ill or do you think I said something else? Do you communicate in such convoluted terms in person?
Gun apologists, tell us again why non-smokers should be expected to continue subsidizing the societal costs of people exercising their freedom to smoke, and then tell us how it’s different to expect others to subsidize the societal costs of gun violence.
No doubt someone will remind us that “gun are a right”, which is true in the limited sense that they are arms, but an unhelpfull generality. Unless one supports all arms types being unrestricted, we are just debating where the line occurs, and gun apologists, while giving lip service to the idea of 2A boundaries and even dismissive of that discussion as a given, are notably unhelpful in defining 2A boundaries of the particular arms type they love-guns. But it’s time to make them own their disingenousness in the discussion of 2A rights. Which brings to mind the old punch line “We’ve already established what you are, ma’am, now we’re just discussing price”.
Support the Gun Violence Cost Recovery Act of 2013!
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 4:06 pm
1) I’ll consider it, when folk on your side of debates on various subjects start parsed, criticizing, etc the comments of others on their own side of the issue under debate. Your claim of such a requirement being necessary in order to have some credibility in discussions might have some credibility, where you and others on your side to be doing it to the comments of others on your own side of the issue, yourself.
2) If the bolded its in your quoted “gun control is not nearly as costly as mental health screenings, adjudications and help. You tell us why it is not front and center? No one can deny that it is not the root cause of someone trying to use a gun for such heinous activity” refer to “mental health” issues, then we are in total agreement and I apologize, profusely. OTOH, if those its in your quoted material refer “gun control” by last comment stands.
I have read the reasoning and certainly recognise the Supreme COurt and the Constitution, however, I simply cannot fathom the love of guns on this site. Guns are a tool meant for killing. As such they should be available for wars, hunting and for police protection. As for other purposes, I simply cannot accept the need for owning these weapons. Some of you simply have a fetish for guns and need to get some help.
It has been proven time and again that you or your family are more likely to be killed when owning a gun by your own gun than by a robber or crook. The protection argument simply does not hold water.
As for war, our government supplies the weapons and your argument for protection against tyranny is preposterous in this age of drones, jets, and other sophisticated weaponry. Your gun will only get you killed as a nut when whereas a peaceful protest is much more effective.
So that leaves hunting as the only legitimate reason to have a gun. Hunters do not use pistols and do not use assualt rifles. There simply is no argument for these in hunting.
The only argument to continue our lack of gun control is simply that you want to argue your political right wing cause rather than face reality or that you are in love with your weapons to the point of irrational thought. You have a Constitutional right to own a gun as a tool, not as a toy. They are not toys and should never be trated as such. Yet many of you treat them as such. Taget practice with no intention of hunting, shooting for the sake of entertainment. A toy. These are weapons meant to kill, NOT TOYS. Find another hobby, spend your money on something productive, stop advocating a cause to protect your hobby. When the Constitution was written, firearms were looked uponn as tools for survival, not toys. For you to argue a right for entertainment purposes is beyond reason.
The arguments for your gun rights are false, illogical, unreasonable, and out of touch with reality. Every person owning a gun should have to prove the purpose and need for such ownership and it should be held to a very strict rule. Guns, like shovels, are a tool to serve mankind, they are no more toys than a spade and should never be treated as such. Those owning guns should have a legitimate need, have to prove that need, and be regularly tested and trained to support a continuing need. All amunition should be locked away until all current gun owners comply.
218.”You know Dave Hicks, if you parsed John Wilburn’s posts the way you do mine, you might have some credibility in this discussion”
comment by Sandi
Don’t hold your breath for that, Sandi. Dave Hicks has repeatedly shown that his cherished identity as an objective logician has some major blind spots and self-exemptions when guns are the topic. Once, I asked him if he’d ever heard of even one gun fetishist, and all his proudly “objective” mind could offer was not Phil Spector, David Koresh or any of the many other publicized examples; no, he would only cite those with different views of the 2A’s limits than his own.
And this weekend Dave Hicks made explicit that he’s considerably less bothered by the thousands of other gun deaths in the U.S. every year than by one that hit close to home. He excused it as just a function of human nature, which is an admission that it’s HIS nature to seldom give compassionate thought to the reality behind statistics from farther away, rather than risk a visceral response that doesn’t put gun saturation in a good light. So he isn’t likely to be interested in applying a consistent degree of critique to all gun posts to which he replies.
My characterization of him stems from the fact that, with his love for lecturing others on logic, I’ve tried to ask Dave Hicks to demonstrate his own slef-awareness by giving us a specific example where his own logic was faulty, even just at the margins. However, all I’ve ever gotten were passive-aggressive non-answers that invariably used IMHO when accuracy might only suggest IMO.
We’ve seen him give many moderate and well reasoned explanations for his stands on non-gun issues, which only highlights his intransigent selectivity on gun issues. He doesn’t seem at all aware, or else doesn’t care, that like his fellow VCDL supporters of a gun saturated society, he’s epitomizing the callous mindset behind the saying “Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how’d you like the play?”
Check out: http://tinyurl.com/bwm9wbe
**
Law Enforcement Firearms
with Richard Fairburn
Newtown shooting: Why Minutemen can protect against active shooters
“Today we need a nation of minute men; citizens who are not only prepared to take up arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as a basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.”
— John F. Kennedy, 1961
SNIP
As I stated, there are simply too few active police or military personnel (including national guardsmen) to staff every school and every bus long-term. But, by looking back to our nation’s founding, we have a no-cost solution readily available.
We need Minutemen to come forward and guard our lambs. Unfortunately, the noble concept of a militia has been bastardized by right-wing fringe groups adopting that name in the ‘80s and ‘90s, but we must overlook them.
Webster defines a militia as: “an organization of citizens with limited military training who are available for emergency service, usually for local defense.” I suggest we organize Minutemen at the state and local level, using these individuals to put an armed protector (in plain clothes with concealed weapons) in every school and on every bus.
The volunteer Minutemen would be required to train periodically — at least a few days each year. Minutemen would, of course, need to be screened to keep out both those of evil intent and ill-equipped “wannabes.” We already have the perfect screening process in place in every state, the background check system we use to hire police and issue concealed weapon permits.
Minutemen must be exempted from every geographic restriction placed on those who currently carry concealed weapons. Virtually every mass killing in recent memory has occurred in a “gun-free zone.” We must authorize our Minutemen to carry everywhere, especially in gun-free zones.
SNIP
**
“Relax”
Advice offered by VCDL member John Wilburn, only days after 20 first graders were shot to death with the type of gun whose use for creating explosions he was explaining.
“(the word)militia has been bastardized by right-wing fringe groups adopting that name in the ‘80s and ‘90s, but we must overlook them”
comment by Dave Hicks
Why must we overlook them? That’s nonsense. Defining militas is a crucial component of 2A interpretation! Besides, they’ve not often been publicly opposed by gun groups before, and certainly didn’t suffer from overt discrimination by gun manufacturers and the manufacturers’ allies at the NRA. If you want to saturate schools with guns, you’ll have to be comprehensive in addressing guns everywhere, including those tacitly LaPierre-appproved paranoia groups.
militias
Sorry Dave Hicks @ 4:45 pm, but you are the poster who has made a reputation with challenging folks on their efforts being: “Ad Hominem”, “Tu Quoque fallacy”, “Argumentum ad Logicam Fallacy”, “Argumentum ad Verecundiam and /or Ipse Dixit fallacies”, and “Reductio ad Hitlerum or argumentum ad Hitlerum fallacies”, not to mention your fondness for alleging the “red herring full of straw…”. Seldom has any liberal berated other bloggers with such strictures of communication on this blog, if ever. And you may rest assured that should one try, I will indeed be all over them for it. It is a deliberate dismissal and insinuation of ignorance and you do it exclusively to those who dare disagree with you, which means it is clearly the disagreement that invites your linguistic blows, not the actual activity you decry. THAT was what I meant. I do not expect anyone to challenge people who mainly agree with them out of some sense of fairness. Although I have most certainly done so.
And yes, thank you, you did “get” what I was saying in the second reading. I was speaking of mental illness as the it, not gun control, in that paragraph.
I would certainly have no objection to actual “Minutemen” being utilized in any community situation needing security; providing they are under the auspices of the police department and have the same oversight. Clearly police officers cannot be everywhere and security guards are expensive and have no greater security expertise. It is sad to see such an effort needed in elementary schools, but not sadder than this loss of life.
I agree with all of the calls for updating school safety reviews and procedures. Awareness and secure locks are certainly part of any solution. As is preparedness.
I would not object to an armed teacher or professor in a school if they have proven training and capability.
As I mentioned, in my discussion with an Iraq veteran recently (and other military folks over time), carrying a gun for self or other’s defense is not the same as being under fire.
Those cannot be the only efforts by any means. We need much better community based mental health outreach and services. As the mom in the viral http://thebluereview.org/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother/ commentary shares, these kids and their families are often isolated and have no help that could make all the difference. We, as a society have failed here too.
I just think it is totally absurd and very sad that we are having a discussion about arming ourselves to the teeth to defend us from ourselves. How ridiculous and stupid.
Re: Sandi Saunders @ 7:13 pm
I would certainly have no objection to actual “Minutemen” being utilized in any community situation needing security; providing they are under the auspices of the police department and have the same oversight. Clearly police officers cannot be everywhere and security guards are expensive and have no greater security expertise. It is sad to see such an effort needed in elementary schools, but not sadder than this loss of life.
I agree with all of the calls for updating school safety reviews and procedures. Awareness and secure locks are certainly part of any solution. As is preparedness.
I would not object to an armed teacher or professor in a school if they have proven training and capability.
——————
Outstanding!
That is exactly what I have been talking about — and (if I understood Dan and others correctly) has been called ridiculous and the like.
In Virginia we already have a mechanize in place that could be easily tweaked to provide such coverage.
See: http://tinyurl.com/bmhthjg “§ 19.2-13. Special conservators of the peace; authority; jurisdiction; registration; bond; liability of employers; penalty; report.” and do a search in LIS ( http://tinyurl.com/cx2ghvl )for “conservator ss peace” (fyi the “ss” means in the same sentence).
This is a tad dated but another very good read:
http://tinyurl.com/c9xtq5z
Warren:
““Relax”
Advice offered by VCDL member John Wilburn, only days after 20 first graders were shot to death with the type of gun whose use for creating explosions he was explaining.”
Yet from the anonymous blog entity known as “Warren” a mere three hours after the murders:
“When the gun absolutists like the VCDL are lobbying to give violence an easier path, there can certainly be discussion of gun statutes regardless of whatever tragedies are in the news. That’s called the gun lobby exception, ( it’s similar to the gun show exception, in which all gun show buyers are presumed to be honorable defenders of liberty).”
Never letting a tragedy go to waste when it can be used for Warren’s purposes. What’s disrespecting a score of little kids when a jab at me or VCDL is in sight!
#236: The VCDL and the NRA: never letting a tragedy go unminimized and the victims left abstract to them. In particular, how typical of Blacksburg VCDL member and child murder horror minimizer John Wilburn, who hasn’t denied he thinks the murdered school children had elected to be in what he calls a “victim pool”, and like other VCDL members on this blog shows every sign of wanting the thousands of gun deaths every year to remain abstractions, to miss the point.
That point is that thanks to gun irresponsiblity enabled by them, there is NO time very long removed from another act of gun violence, so gun policy discussion will always be proximate to another tragedy. Thus any claim that gun policy discussion is using a tragedy is no more than a transparent effort at demonization of others.
The final part of that post was to tell gun apologists that when the Va. GA convenes, there’ll be no more of the easy path for their perpetual gun mania to continue facilitating violence, and nationally they’re going to eventually be expected to pay the FULL costs to society of their violent obsession, instead of the de facto subsidies they enjoy now.
I sincerely hope the NRA does offer something meaningful in their news conference on Friday.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/12/18/nra-statement-on-newtown-school-shootings/?mod=google_news_blog
Word is that the Asperger gunman destroyed his hard drive prior to the shooting.
The Virginia Tech gunman did the same.
Funny how the Democrat party is using the shooting to push for gun control but you blame the NRA, who holds no seats in government.
No henry they just buy the members of Congress to assure no damage to the gun industry or themselves.
Ron
Maybe the voters put people in office, not money. Unless, of course, you think Obama was bought.
The NRA didn’t shoot up that school. The Asperger kid did it. No amount of spin can change that. If Assault Weapons are the problem, why do police carry them to protect us?
The most rational point of view I have encountered in this most recent politicalization of this senseless slaying of innocents comes from Gov Perry(Texas) and McDonnell (VA). . .end gun free zones and allow CCP holders to provide a measure of security for themselves and others.
IMO, those crying for more gun control are idiots desparate to try again what has not, nor will not, work.
Funny how the Democrat party is using the shooting to push for gun control but you blame the NRA, who holds no seats in government.
Comment by Henry — December 18, 2012 @ 6:17 pm
Henry… are you being serious? Is this facetious? I mean come on dude? For real?
I haven’t posted a word regarding the gun issue. I usually don’t debate this issue on this blog as the points of view are well established. I do believe in common sense laws and believe there should be tighter controls on gun ownership in this country. I would encourage anyone with similar points of view to donate here:
http://www.bradycampaign.org/
That’s what I am going to do.
Leon, you can hide in the safety of anonymity and call us “fools” and “idiots” as you like and Dan allows, but the facts remain. These “assault weapons” are the weapon of choice for mass shootings, for the gun culture, for the movies, videos and music displays and imagery and it is sickeningly easy to find one you can use once you set your sights on such destruction. Why any rational person thinks we have no need to, at the very least, make that acquisition much harder is just beyond understanding. There are plenty of other defense weapons and guns available. This is not some terrible burden anyone is placing on gun owners. It just isn’t.
#242 Leon,
Could you please repost using the English language? I know you are trying to make a point but its all for naught if you post in swaheli or whatever the hell language you’ve been trying to communicate in.
Hope this helps.
#242 I see that any new rules about personal insults have already fallen by the wayside. suzie, come on back. You can be just as ugly as you please.
“The Asperger kid did it.”
What is this new fixation of your, Henry?
After seeing Henry posting and knowing how much he loves Free Republic, I thought I’d pass along one of the brilliant posts from FR speculating about the shooting. This one was from a person whose been a Freeper since 1998, about the same amount of time as Henry, if I remember correctly”
“Was he romantically interested in one of the teachers and rejected in that process? So, he not only kills her, but all of her students as well. Islam would say that since he killed Americans, he should get his 72 virgins in “heaven”. Haven’t heard the Muslims living her condemning these kills nor the media pointing out they haven’t said a word. Interesting.”
So somehow either the Muslims are involved or at least approve because this person isn’t aware of Muslims rising up en masse to condemn the killings.
Other posts in the same thread seem to suggest that this massacre is part of a liberal plot to grab guns, possibly so that the government can then confiscate all 401(k) plans. And all the gold. And turn us all over to the UN.
Just in case you need nay yucks, or simply want a look into the paranoid, irrational mind of these folks, here’s the link.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2969301/posts?page=21#21
“why do police carry them to protect us?” Henry
Because the police have had extensive training, and they have went through extensive background checks as well. Have you? Doubtful.
The comment by Leon that was personally insulting has been removed. Thanks for the heds up, gdad.
“Because the police have had extensive training, and they have went through extensive background checks as well”
So the guns aren’t the problem. It’s the people that are the problem. So why are we wanting to ban guns if they aren’t the problem.
“After seeing Henry posting and knowing how much he loves Free Republic”
Think about someone else for a change, please. It’s creepy. The head of the Houston Democrat Party said he wanted to kill NRA members. How’s that for kookiness? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2969832/posts
“Can we now shoot the #NRA and everyone who defends them?”
“They need to [be] wiped off the face of the earth,”
“All NRA members should be shot!!!! ” http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2969717/posts
Henry, the comment “Asperger gunman” and this one “Asperger kid” are really sad comments on you, not children who have the Asperger’s spectrum of Autism. I know that anonymity emboldens hate and vicious words but that is so uncalled for. These kids have such a hard row to hoe and your comments are helping no one. There was much, much more at play in that young man than just Asperger’s Syndrome. Don’t the different, odd, unique, and labeled people in this country suffer enough for you?
Henry, buddy, I think about all sorts of people on this blog. suzie, pammala, you, Frank, matt (wherever he went), MMM (wherever he went), VRWC (wherever he went), LC (wherever he went), terps, mike O, John W. Apologies to anybody I left out.
Sandi
The kid shot up a school full of children. I will not use his name and he had Aspergers. So far that is all the media will tell us about him so that’s what I will use. The fact you don’t want to hear it is not my fault. It’s better then blaming an inanimate object for the massacre.
When the media comes up with a better explanation, I will change. But I suspect Aspergers is all we will get and it is a good enough reason for his “irrational” behavior. We are not drooling little slugs rocking in a corner.
You are right, it is the person. But we can’t send you to an island, or throw you in an incinerator. All we can do is keep those guns out of the hands of the people who would use them to murder innocent people.
Henry, when a gun walks into a school and starts murdering people, then we can talk. Until then, lets linger in the realm of reality here. This is a blog, not a church.
253 Sandi
Henry, the comment “Asperger gunman” and this one “Asperger kid” are really sad comments on you, not children who have the Asperger’s spectrum of Autism. I know that anonymity emboldens hate and vicious words but that is so uncalled for. These kids have such a hard row to hoe and your comments are helping no one. There was much, much more at play in that young man than just Asperger’s Syndrome. Don’t the different, odd, unique, and labeled people in this country suffer enough for you?
Thank you, Sandi! Thank you!
255 Henry
he kid shot up a school full of children. I will not use his name and he had Aspergers. So far that is all the media will tell us about him so that’s what I will use. The fact you don’t want to hear it is not my fault. It’s better then blaming an inanimate object for the massacre.
If you won’t say his name (I understand that), why not call him “the shooter, the killer, the murderer, the maniac”? I don’t blame an inanimate object. I blame him! I’d bet big bucks his ASD played into his actions, but your use of “Asperger’s Kid” etc. is insulting to me! I’ve taught MANY children who fall somewhere under the Autism Spectrum Disorder and I deeply love someone with autism. Can’t you just be nice, for my sake, and call him something else?
Also, if my school told me I needed to be trained and carry a gun at school, I’d do it and I know several others who would, too! I would do ANYTHING to protect my kids!