This event is only a few hours old as this is being written, but it is already possible to predict what will happen as a result of it, namely those in charge of public policy will draw all the wrong conclusions from it and push for “solutions” that will really solve nothing.
The “press conference” (quotation marks seem justified) with the man currently occupying the highest office in the land should be regarded as highly indicative of the relationship that presently exists between the recumbent “media” and the nation’s CEO. Unless I’m mistaken, not one of the press ventured to ask him any questions after he made his tearful statement, as they would have if it had been anyone else standing there. That’s their job!
It would be too much to ask that those tears might have been prompted by the realization on his part that all of the anti-Second Amendment hostility his administration has engendered and exploited resulted in twenty-seven deaths in Connecticut.
It wouldn’t be at all surprising if the school where the tragedy occurred has, like the one I taught at, a sign out front proudly declaring THIS IS A GUN-FREE ZONE, with an implied MASS MURDERERS WELCOME — YOU WILL MEET NO RESISTANCE.
The whole situation looks like another photo-op for gun control advocates.
Their “solution,” as always, will be to disarm responsible Americans and make future massacres even more likely.
Its because of people like you that tragedies like this continue to exist. A gun is for killing, for taking lives. There can be responsible people with guns, but they could have a breakdown or be pushed to a point in anger. It is easy to pull the trigger on a gun, very difficult to stab someone. There is no reason why any people going about their day to day lives should hold weapons for killing and those who think they do have a reason have blood on their hands. And to say that the situation looks like a photo opportunity? You are inhumane.
To Roxanne Cole:
One should always read with care. Tragedies like this continue to exist in spite of thousands of gun laws already on the books simply because someone has elected to ignore them.
Guns have a dual purpose: To kill, yes, but also to defend against those who would kill. It is not possible to count how many times a would-be thief or killer has been deterred from committing a crime because their intended victim was armed, but deterrence has been shown to work.
Anyone anywhere and at any time can lose self-control, with or without a gun being handy. That’s why only responsible people should legally carry firearms. The alternative is for the state to determine who does or does not carry a weapon for self-defense, and that is not acceptable to citizens who merit and reasonably demand being treated like mature adults. That element of doubt in the criminal’s mind — are they packing lethal heat? — could probably save more lives in one month than all the lives lost in massacres for the last fifty years.
Photo ops are and always have been the order of the day in politics, and those who support or oppose gun control do them all the time.
Finally, what is truly inhumane is to leave tens of thousands of children vulnerable to mass murderers for politically correct “reasons.” In so doing, American politicians constantly play Russian Roulette with our lives — yours and mine.
And finally, while I support the Second Amendment unreservedly, I presently don’t own a gun, but only because (a) it’s too expensive and (b) I’m a klutz. See how I’m being a responsible citizen? To judge from your response, I infer that you don’t own a gun either. Thus you may congratulate yourself on your good citizenship as well, because, were you to possess one, with such an attitude towards firearms you would be a greater menace to society than I.
— Mike Gray