Somewhere in western Connecticut on Friday, a parent dressed her child warmly, making sure she had packed her lunch.
She waited for the bus with her at the end of the driveway.
When it arrived, she probably waved, and reminded her to have a great day. It’s Friday, she probably said, and we have a great weekend planned.
The bus drove away, windows fogged with the breath of children, and soon was out of sight.
And then.
A phone call. A radio report. Speeding ambulances. Police tape. A crime scene, inside a school.
A suspect. An automatic weapon, built for mass killing.
Will it happen to you?
What would you do?
We are sick and bloody tired of this.
Others are waiting for the next set of corpses, hiding behind the Second Amendment.
If someone like this tries to convince you that, if not for the gun, the Sandy Hook school murderer would have found some other way to do a mass killing of young kids, let them know what else the federal government regulates.
Such as what you are allowed to carry on an airplane, for example.
One guy tries to blow up his shoe, and now every airline passenger for the rest of eternity has to strip nearly naked in order to fly.
And someone is saying an assault weapons ban is too broad?
These 18 kids, ages 5 to 8, gunned down at their desks on Friday … someone is saying they were somehow destined for a bloody, horrific fate?
What was their crime?
Still, there are those who cling fast to the belief that everyone needs and deserves access to firearms — but that’s just as true as saying everyone needs and deserves access to automobiles, or alcohol, or many of the hundreds of hazardous substances the government regulates without protest.
All people need access to firearms, they say, even the assault weapons like the Sandy Hook murderer had — ones built only to kill, and kill rapidly — because that’s what the framers of the Constitution had in mind.
The right to have as many weapons of any type trumps my right — my innocent child’s right — to safety.
And the language of the Second Amendment — that a “well-regulated militia” has the right to bear arms — surely that doesn’t mean the military, or the police. Surely that was meant to be a mob of individuals of any temperament or mental status.
Guns don’t kill people.
Really?
There is a special place in hell for murderers.
Especially for the killers of innocent children.
But that’s cold comfort to the parents of those poor, massacred children who died with their backs to the wall and their heads buried in their hands, begging for mercy, on Friday.
We believe that there’s a similar place reserved for those who would continue to allow these horrific American tragedies to continue beneath the guise of freedom.
The Times Record (Dec. 14)
What is the author’s position on partial birth abortion?
My guess would be they support a women’s right to choose. The “author” is (are) the editor or editorial board of “The Times Record – Serving the Communities of Mid-Coast Maine and Beyond”
Leave it the ignorant to equate this horrific incident to abortion.
Violence is violence, whether it’s in the womb or out of the womb. Killing the innocent can never be justified.
Like I said leave it to the ignorant. I guess you more than qualify.
Are you saying that ALL those who disagree with your radical positions are ignorant? This isn’t a good way to defend your radical positions, now is it?
If you want to see radical, look in the mirror
Radical position? And nope just you. You’re the one who tried to equate this horror to abortion.
Relevance?
Hypocrisy
By whom?
Way to take a tragedy and immediately try to use it to further your own views. Nicely done, you’re a class act. *sarcasm*
It’s disgusting that you look at the intent to prevent more tragedies like this as something so dark. That you call it classless. People don’t support gun control for no purpose at all, they support gun control because tragedies like this happen.
Mentally deficient people will not be stopped by gun control. They will be stopped by “mentally ill people” control. Reopen state asylums and put them somewhere safe.
They think of no one but themselves and their interests.
Way to immediately try to shut down discussion of a tragedy to further your own views. Nicely done, you are a tool. No sarcasm.
What you’ve written made no sense. How precisely am I trying to further my own views or shut down discussion?
I stated that’s what the author was doing. The article they’ve written is not meant as a discussion of the tragedy, it’s the author using the tragedy as a soap box to harp about gun control.
It’s pompous and presumptuous of you to assume my views are one way or another based on my one comment, or perhaps my user name. In my assessment no one on either side of any argument should use 20 dead children and six dead adults as a trump card for their own political agenda. It’s sickening.
What a load of irrational, emotional, and factually wrong mush.
You’re right. And it was so wrong for those children to get in the way of those bullets.
Take away our guns and the only ones with guns will be the Goverment!!!!! Wake up !!
Yes and we know how much the govenment simply wants to enslave us. Much like the goverment of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, Australia have enslaved their people. Do you really think that if the government using the army really wanted to enslave us that those puny little killing machines are going to stop them?
Once again, reality trumps liberal fantasy.
Gun control will always end up with these “gun free” zones.
And as always, the only ones with the guns will be the criminals.
I’ll take my chances with criminals in order to increase the odds of my family making it home at night.
Armed or unarmed?
And as always a cruel heartless void delivered by You sir.
No more so than the anti gun crowd crowing that this was all the gun owners fault.
Get a life.
Crowing?? Get real.
Exactly. Have you noticed too. Be glad you are not like that.
“A Sensible Proposal”
Unlike many others on the Right, I applaud the major medias’ concern with gun violence. In fact, I’ve even gone so far as to create a plan through which the major media could make a unique contribution to reducing that violence, and submitted it to many national newspapers and journals. Here’s my standard ‘letter to the Editor’:
Oddly enough, it hasn’t made it past an editor yet.
Nice try. :-) While the editors and media elite would love to restrict the 2nd amendment rights of millions based on the actions of a few, they don’t look at the 1st amendment the same way. That is where they butter their bread. They seek to quash the rights of others, not themselves. Personlly I’m going to advocate for “mentally ill people” control. That seems to be the real root of the problem. Reopen state asylums.
Mixed bag, so I’m not going to vote either way. Your censorship advocacy sounds like some sort dictatorship, possibly even communistic which we know you see everywhere.
Oddly? You must be kidding but you aren’t.
I aren’t?
If we take away people’s right to have a gun, then the only ones with guns will be the government. Arm the teachers and teach people to defend themselves and not relie on the government for everything.
Welcome to Dodge (even Dodge had a green line).
“Arm the teachers and teach people to defend themselves and not relie on the government for everything.”
Because having kids caught in a cross fire is surely kill fewer people. Why stop there – why not let the kids have a concealed carry?
The 2nd Amendment isn’t a blank check on gun ownership.
Unfortunately far too many think it is. I have no problem with people owning guns for hunting, target practice, even self protection but we don’t need the kind of guns involved in so many of these shootings. But I guess so long as the children being killed aren’t the children of NRA members, it doesn’t matter.
It’s time to reopen the state asylums and sweep the mentally ill back out of sight. I’m tired of watching the carnage. The real bond shared by all the mass shooters we’ve been forced to see is a mental deficiency and too much freedom. Sorry if you were born with a weak mind but buh-bye.
And just how are you going to know who is going to do such a thing as this? It’s not until they do that often we discover they did have a problem. I say regulate guns a bit more and even though these types of things won’t stop, at least they might be reduced in the number of senseless deaths.
28, maybe more, people are dead and the left cannot even wait till their bodies are cold before playing politics.
May the Lord Jesus comfort those parents, families and kin of the children, may He be with the children, spouses, moms and dads of the adults killed as well.
In April of 1993, I found that only Christ can get you through the violent, sudden and unexpected death of a child. As Mrs. Bush said to my wife and I at the time, I now say to the parents, families and kin of those killed in Connecticut, “Only Christ can get you through this,stay close to Him and let Him stay close to you.”
Jesus said: “Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For My yoke is easy, and My burden is light.” Matthew 11:28-30 ACP/KJV
What a lousy way to spend CHRISTmas. My heart goes out to all, but especially the parents, brothers and sisters of those 20 little one.
Great post except for the first sentence. I almost didn’t read the rest of it after I saw that. Would that you saw fit to post only the rest of the comment. In the future, may God-given wisdom prompt your comforting messages devoid of political digs.
Just a note – sandwiching your thoughts and prayers between political attacks doesn’t exactly make you look too sincere yourself.
You don’t sound much like a genuine reverend./pastor.
Come and take them.
http://heartlandrevolt.squarespace.com/blog/2012/12/14/barry-obummer-michael-bloombot-michael-three-cheeseburgers-m.html
The police have already reported that the guns used were legally purchased and registered to the shooter’s mother. He murdered her with those legal guns, stole them, and then used them to commit this atrocity.
If he was willing to violate the laws against murder 26 times, as well as probably a dozen other laws against carrying concealed weapons, weapons on school grounds, etc.. why do you think that more ink on paper would have stopped him?
The police reacted quickly, but were still took several minutes. What do you suggest people do if confronted by someone intent on killing them, call 911 and ask the murderer to sit down, have a cup of coffee and wait for the police?
There are no perfect solutions but the belief that more, not less, guns are the solution is becoming as tiresome as the belief that tax cuts create jobs.
Why aren’t there more mass shootings at gun shows then?
No but why don’t we simply outlaw those types of guns period. Even make those that have them now turn them in, compensated of course. These guns are unnecessary, they’re designed solely to kill people. Would that take all these types of guns off the market? No. Would it stop all these type of attacks? No, but it could potentially cut down on the number of deaths from these types of incidents. In this case probably by a lot if this man had not had those those of guns so readily available.
Just five school employees at the school with concealed weapons and the ability to use them would have changed the outcome of this tragic event.
Good luck with your liberal/progressive gun free zones.
Sure until one of those perfectly legitimate gun carriers flys off the wall and starts shooting. More guns are not the anwerl. I’ll admit banning these types of guns are not the complete answer either but it is a good start.
The discussion should be about how we can help the mentally ill, not about gun control. These mass murders are committed by very disturbed, sick individuals. The mindset of these killers is to seek revenge against some real or perceived wrong that has been committed against them. Once they have gotten to a certain point, they WILL find a way to carry out their plan. Neither gun control laws or even complete repeal of the 2nd Amendment will get in the way of the enactment of that revenge fantasy. Legislation will not stop gun crime; criminals have no regard for the law and will always find a way to access guns and will have no problem arming a mentally ill person.
“The discussion should be about how we can help the mentally ill, not about gun control. ”
The discussion should be about both. We may not decide to act on both, but we need to be talking about it.
This is far more about mental illness than it is about access to guns. This man shot his mother in the face at point blank range. That is a lot of rage. He was going to have his revenge whether by shooting her or by cutting her throat. He was going to have his revenge whether by shooting the children in her classroom or by strapping explosives to his chest and walking into that room and detonating. This is about an irrational person who was bent on righting perceived wrongs. He’d made his plan and there would be no deviating unless someone recognized that he was ill and acted to help him.
It is about both.
Really? I doubt very much he would have made a bomb, strapped it on and gone to that school. Yes this is about mental illness but it is far far more about the ability to have these types of guns. There simply is no logical reason for it and they need to be banned.
No, it’s much more about gun control than helping the mentally ill. In the first place there is no indication at all that this man would have been helped because there apparently is no indication that he was mentally ill. So how do you propose to help him if his illness is unknown? Are we all going to be subject to a “mental illness” test and only those that pass will be able to get guns? We can’t help what we don’t know but we can reduce the number of deaths simply by eliminating these types of guns.
So we just do nothing and accept that this is the collateral damage for our freedoms? That’s disgusting.
Gun control would not have stopped this guy. If he was determined to kill these children, there are thousands of ways to do it that do not involve guns. Gun control would only limit the purchase of new guns. What about the millions and millions of guns that have already been made? We need to put more effort into stopping these people with mental health care before they go off the deep end. Gun control is a knee jerk reaction and will do nothing to prevent heinous crimes like this in the future. Again, there are thousands of ways to kill other than guns.
Fewer guns means fewer gun homicides. That’s fact.
Obviously there are other ways to kill, but there aren’t mass killings of this magnitude with knifes for example.
He could have stolen a chemical tanker and driven it through the same school and killed many more kids than he did. Would we then scream to outlaw chemical tankers? Again, what about the millions and millions of guns already out there? Are you advocating kicking down doors and confiscating all guns? That could get messy. I maintain that we need to put the funding back for mental health care and stop people like Adam Lanza before he cracks up and starts killing kids. It is the only sane and plausible approach. We need to guard against knee jerk reactions to something like this. It is human nature to seek revenge or draconian solutions for such heinous crimes, especially when there are children involved.
And your answer elsewhere was to arm the teachers right? Well, that doesn’t solve the problem because he could have just taken a chemical tanker and driven it through the school.
It’s not fair to hold my solution to a higher standard than your solution.
I never advocated arming the teachers. You have me confused with another poster. I do not believe more guns is the answer any more than I believe less guns is. I believe more funding for mental health care is. I find it a little ironic that the people who seem to scream the loudest about their second amendment rights are also the ones who beat the drum the hardest for cutting funding for mental health. We can’t have it both ways.
I think the approach needs to be balanced. Absolutely, yes, more funding towards mental health and preventative measures of that nature.
I do think very powerful weapons are far too easy to obtain. You’re never going to convince me that you need to massive high capacity weapons protect your home or for hunting. We can have sensible regulations without preventing ownership.
I know you mentioned knee jerk reactions, but something has to be done. And the second we even suggest the need for a conversation, there is a knee jerk reaction from one side acting like guns are about to be banned entirely. Saying we have to wear seat belts and setting a speed limit isn’t a step away from banning cars, so people shouldn’t be acting like gun control is a step away from banning guns.
I think high capacity assault weapons should probably be controlled, but I do not believe it would have prevented this tragedy. 5 six shot revolvers would have done the same damage. The only way to prevent this type of tragedy is to stop it before it occurs and that is nearly impossible to do. Stronger mental health checks and balances are probably our only hope for future prevention. But, the right is dead set against paying for it out of their precious pots of gold. So, I would expect more of this type of heinous behavior, not less.
Agree with much of what you said here. The right wing is “in bed” with the NRA.
I want to know how you would have stopped Lanza before he cracked up. Just tell me how more funding for mental illness would have stopped him.
I am not sure that he could have been stopped. My point is that with over 300 million guns in the hands of private citizens in America already, it is a little late for gun control. Better mental health control would have been our only chance. Even then, the chances would have been remote.
Yes there are, in countries with “gun control”
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/chinas-school-killings-and-social-despair/
5 times our population and a fraction of the deaths we’ve had this year in mass shootings.
So, no, there aren’t.
Denial of facts helps nothing. perhaps a bit more research on your part is called for.
Quite frankly, I am sick to my stomach over this. I am also aware that the true problem, the change in social values/standards/acceptance that has led to such an increase in acts such as this, will be ignored, whether it involves mental illness or the devalueing of human life, ect,etc. We’ll find anywhere/anything to pin the blame on, other than the society we are evolving into..
I’m not denying facts. I said this isn’t happening to the magnitude elsewhere with knifes. And that if FACTUALLY true.
China has 5 times our population and you cited deaths that add up to a fraction of the deaths total we’ve had just this year from mass shootings.
Don’t project your poor behavior onto me. You’re the one needing to do research. Overall our crime rates have been going down (despite the all too common mass shootings) since the 60s, so your claim about society devolving is garbage.
Really,,, hmmm,, then I guess we don’t have to worry about it, and all the posts here are over nothing. BTW, what I presented was only school children murders, but I guess you overlooked that in your research. Please excuse my poor behavior. Have a nice day.
What I asked was whether this was happening elsewhere with knifes to the same degree and as a matter of fact, it is not.
Keep telling yourself that, it will let you sleep better.
Keep telling yourself the world is flat, it’s not.
For it to be of the same magnitude, it there would need to be 5 times the knife deaths over there as they have 5 times our population. The numbers you cited are fraction of what is happening over here with guns.
Change in social values?? The people in that town were living good and , normal lives…..going to work, school, church….raising wonderful children, just like in many communities all over this country.
This is about an individual who did not fit in. He isolated, didn’t work or go to college. 20 yrs old. Stayed alone and probably on the computer, alone in his room. No one ever saw him. Described as very socially awkward but very bright. No empathy. Those kind of individuals have tunnel vision. It is all about them and the world and everyone is against them (in their minds.) That is not about devalueing life except by this killer who had no empathy. Most all the families in that town as all over this country live their lives trying to be good people and do the right thing.
What a horrible way to see the world….the way you do.
I see reality. Sorry you can not.
No, it is not a knee jerk reaction. People are just sick and tired of all these mass killings. Knee jerk? I don’t think so. There is no reason for someone like that evil killer to have guns that have that power and can shoot so many, execution style. Yes, he used his mother’s guns. What was wrong with her, one wonders. That was a community where people did not lock their doors and she felt the need to have all those high powered guns. A relative said she was paranoid and talked of the end of the world. She took her socially isolated son who could not interact with others to the shooting range. That sure was helpful! It seems like there was a lot wrong in that house. It seems that she also was a bit deranged. What is the name of those people (begins with an L) who horde their provisions,etc. in the basement, etc. as they think the world is coming to an end. A relative described the mother that way. Doesn’t sound very normal, or sane.
May the murderer burn in hell for what he did.
The FBI estimates that there are over 300 million guns in America. I think it is a little late for gun control. We need better mental health control in this country if we are to have any hope of preventing these heinous crimes in the future.
How about closing gun show loopholes; is that too radical for the NRA/
Weren’t the guns registered to the killer’s mother?
Unfortunately, all gun registration does is tell the authorities where to look after the crime has been committed. It would have done nothing to stop it from occurring in the first place. More funding and attention to mental health would have been much more effective in this case. Too bad it is the favorite place to “trim” the budget for many conservatives.
Still want you to tell us how more funding for mental health would have “much more effective in this case.” as you claim. First of all he would have had to be diagnosed and just how do you expect to do that?
The FBI estimates that there are over 300 million guns in America. I think it is a little late for gun control. Sadly, in the end, there probably is no preventing crimes like this. My point was that better mental health services would have been our only chance at preventing this crime. Would that chance be remote? Absolutely. No where’s near as remote as gun control at this point though.
Garbage article. Read US history. You will discover who and what the Militia were, they were the original protectors of our country. They were ordinary citizens possessing their own weapons.
during a time of war.
And who are the militia going to protect us from now? Our own goverment? If the military decides to end this republic do you really think these guns are going to stop them?
Yes. by all means, do not hesitate tp take a tragedy, and try to turn it into ones personal agenda for whatever purpose. I can not help but notice that the above article is written even before the blood has been cleaned off the floors. But what of the shooter himself? No mention there of the actual person who pulled the trigger(s).
Let’s consider for a moment the circumstances.
1. The School is a “gun free zone” therefore it is not legal to possess a firearm of any type on the property.
2. The shooter is 20 years of age. He is by law prohibited from owning or possessing handguns in the state of Connecticut.
3 The school had just implemented a new security policy thereby implementing a false sense of security.
4. Since firearms are banned on the school grounds, responsible adults are prohibited from carrying arms and NO ONE was able to stop this individual from his intent.
5 This individual MAY have had a mental problem for which he was being or should have been being treated. We may never know because MSM will not tell us that. (patient privacy will be cited as the reason)
6 This individual May have been given drugs as a student at the direction of school authorities rather than work with a student because some teachers don’t want to be bothered to work with active students. (It’s easier to keep them doped up don’t you know)
7 Denial of the teaching of a Supreme Being who watches over us all our lives is banned and the promotion of irresponsibility is the result. (Perhaps the Muslims are right on this one. It may be easier to eliminate a problem before it happens than to deal with the aftermath when an individual displays disrespect of Deity.
8 The failure to teach responsibility is a result of “Progressive thought” If there is no responsibility then there can be no retribution.
9. “THOU SHALT NOT KILL” Can’t teach that one, might be religious.
10 “THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR” (NO LYING) Can’t teach that either to much religious undertone regardless of it’s obviousness.
11 “THOU SHALT HONOR THY FATHER AND THY MOTHER” A simple thing that most parents need to teach at home but that is more earned than taught but should be reinforced by school however when school seeks to remove the parents from decision making how can this be taught? It becomes a contradiction in authority.
12. Free birth control and abortion for school age kids without parental involvement or notification teaches kids that there is NO respect for life and that killing children is normal. In fact is big business. Abortion agencies have killed millions more than Dr. Kevorkian ever did.
13. Marriage itself is under assault and the vows made are a minor inconvenience making secondary the needs of children who need 2 parents to be raised in a home with proper guidance to become responsible adults and a benefit to society as a whole.
14 Lastly, No so called assault weapon was used to commit this atrocity. Semi auto handguns (police sidearms) of which the original concept was designed over 100 years ago. The so called sophisticated weapons of which I have read previously. utilizing ammunition just as antique in design.
These things are troubling in and of themselves but taken altogether; one can only conclude that such mayhem will continue to manifest itself upon the public until we reach a decision to say enough of this progressive bullshit and purge it from human society forever. Perhaps it may take more violence to accomplish that goal perhaps not, let us pray that cooler thought prevails and that men will see that self determination without divine guidance is never going to succeed
So when is the proper time to talk about gun violence? These mass murders are happening quiet frequently, you know. Tell us how long we have to wait after one to discuss gun violence. Tell us what’s appropriate.
And how disgusting of you. Saying we may need more violence to fix society. That’s disgusting and shameful.
Some points OK and relevant. Others aren’t, won’t vote one way or another.
More violence? Glad more intelligent , compassionate minds than yours will prevail. You have it very wrong about what is wrong in this country. And by the way, who one loves is not the problem. We need more of that (love) and less hate.
You want a theocracy then go to a country that has one but your arguments are, to be frank, stupid. Can’t teach it’s wrong to kill? Of course we can and do. Can’t teach not to lie? Again of course we can and do. What we can’t do is force your religious absurdity on others. That is really what you want isn’t it? You and your holier than thou bullshit is just that: bullshit.
Best post and summary of anyone here.
Has anyone thought, that if one of those teachers were armed there might have been a different outcome? guns used..not even his…cali and ny both have unconstitutional gun laws yet more violent crimes. I don’t here you jumping up and down for the 18 year old mother that saved her baby by shooting an attacker…or the little girl that saved her family with a gun…be smart, the only people who follow gun laws are the people who wouldn’t do this. All you do is make it easier for us who follow the laws to become victims.
delusional, are you suggesting the teachers wear a holstered weapon and become quick draw experts? OR maybe put armed guards and police at every entrance at every public building? WOW we will be truly free and safe in your fantasy land police state until everyone starts shooting. Good solution.
Want to go back to the OK Corral days?
It’s an absurd argument even coming from you. But in regards to the mother and the child, I believe both used them in their own homes against an invasion of some sort and neither involved the use of the types of guns that were used here.
It’s the right to bear arms, not the right to use weapons of mass destruction.