News Stories

Can We Stop the Violence?

In the Bible, Jeremiah 31:15 and Matthew 2:18 both tell the same story: "A voice was heard in Ramah, Lamentation and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children, Refusing to be comforted for her children, Because they are no more."

In light of the plague of gun massacres sweeping the United States, senators are calling for a new look at gun control laws. So far, fear of the power of the National Rifle Association has muted debate on the issue, but the horror of recent crimes (NOTE: Subscribers can listen to this), most notably the Newton, Connecticut crime, have brought the issue back to the forefront. A fundamental change of public opinion toward more stringent gun control appears to be motivating the change in the debate. In addition, it is being noted that Australia, which banned assault rifles after a massacre in 1996, has not suffered one since.

On the Big Story website, Anne Flaherty quotes Rep. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) as saying that the time for "saying that we can't talk about policy implications of tragedies like this is over."

She quotes Brian Malte, of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, as saying, "If you look at the states with the strongest gun laws in the country, they have some of the lowest gun death rates, and some of the states with the weakest gun laws have some of the highest gun death rates."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) says that the reason Barack Obama and Senate Democrats haven't pushed for new gun controls is because of the power of the National Rifle Association, but Feinstein says she'll propose legislation next year that would ban big clips, drums and strips of more than 10 bullets. Flaherty quotes her as saying, "It can be done." A ban on these that lasted for a decade expired in 2004.

But not everyone agrees that gun control is the answer. Rep. Louie Gohmert, (R-Texas), thinks that the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School, who authorities say died trying to overtake the shooter, should herself have been armed.

Flaherty quotes him as saying, "I wish to God she had had an M-4 in her office, locked up so when she heard gunfire, she pulls it out and she didn't have to lunge heroically with nothing in her hands. But she takes him (the shooter) out, takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids."

Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois says that it's time for a national discussion that includes school safety. Flaherty quotes him as saying, "This conversation has been dominated in Washington by--you know and I know--gun lobbies that have an agenda. We need people, just ordinary Americans, to come together, and speak out, and to sit down and calmly reflect on how far we go."

  • News Source:
  • AP

Ignorance knows no bounds. Gohmert wishes the Principal had had an M-4. Right. So we now hire Principals based on their marksmanship?!?!?!? And expect that said Principal has a steady hand, nerves of steel and can lock, load, aim and fire within the blink of an eye , taking the madman out without collateral damage?
Sounds like someone has been renting too many Rambo movies......

Some years ago, a friend of mine worked in a retail store that was open late at night. Twice, he was held up. First time by 2 individuals with knives, who got away with cash and the second time by a gunman, who left empty-handed. He said that when the second robbery happened, he was so angry that he grabbed the nearest object - a hockey stick - and charged at the robber, letting out a primal kind of roar and scared the guy away.

My friend was damned lucky. Lucky that his instincts worked for him and lucky that the gunman was likely inexperienced with the weapon and that the weapon was not an assault rifle. And....lucky that the robber was after money, not blood.

That Connecticut Principal was not so lucky. She lunged at the intruder - her instincts in high gear. I suspect this decision was not so much a decision as it was a reflex. Unfortunately she was up against a highly-motivated killer, who was heavily armed and had plenty of practice. The only possibility for succeeding in her attempt to intercept him would have probably involved her carrying a loaded weapon. But how insane is THAT?

Gohmert worries about 'where do we draw the line when bringing in gun control?' flash.....where do we draw the line when we allow educators to arm themselves? Bullet-proof vests? Night-vision goggles? Electric fences? Pat-downs and X-rays every morning? This is not the world I want for the next generation!

My heart and prayers go out to the victims of Friday's shooting. It was an incomprehensible act of pure evil.

Like you Fontaine I don't want to live in a world like this either but the harsh reality of it is that we do. Yes, monsters exist. We live in a scary world. A world where I can't let my kids play unattended outside because of unusually large coyotes, mountain lions and bears. Worst of all there are humans with evil intent. They are the worst of all the dangerous animals. They have the ability to reason and they are very crafty when executing their dark deeds.

We all know that there is not much that can be done about the Humans that are intent on doing evil. In the emotion of it all attacking their methods seems right. Ban guns, Ban knifes, ban freedoms..... In the end the monster intent on doing evil will still do evil. Laws are for law abiding citizens. Passing a gun ban would only take guns away from law abiding citizens. The monster doesn't care about your gun ban.

Take The United Kingdom for example. They have pretty strict Gun laws. A large majority of the police there don't even carry. That didn't stop my Nephew from being murdered in a night club with a gun in London.

Now imagine your favorite John Wayne movie. Take all the guns from the good guys. You have a movie where the bad guys kill everyone. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. It sucks but it's true. Heck, we wouldn't even need guns if there were no bad guys. Yeah, I want to live in that world. The one with no bad guys.

Now as you contemplate disarming all the law abiding citizens who only want to protect their precious loved ones from the monsters of the world. Think about that world were only the bad guys have guns. Is that the world you want to live in?

I'd love to stay on this soap box all day but I'll spare you.

In closing I'd like to tell you about a good guy with a gun that brought a mall shooting to an end without even firing a shot. It happened in Oregon just a few weeks ago. God I wish he was in Connecticut on Friday.

God bless all the children.

The elephant in the room is not the means that a severely psychotic person used, but rather he went untreated by a society that routinely underfunds mental health care. Many people pontificate about the 'takers' in our society and that everyone needs to be responsible for their own actions, yet conveniently ignore those in need until they complete so act like this.

Gun control only hurts the law abiding citizens. Criminals and those bent of some type of 'statement' will always find a way or method.

Although I do think assault rifles should be banned, I also think the gun cat is out of the bag. Gun control tomorrow is not going to protect children the day after. Why not an armed guard at the school? Perhaps gated access? I know these cost money, but they could be effective, where the mere existence of new laws could very well not be.

The other problem is, you can make one location secure, like the school, but then other holes become the weak link in the chain. Like a gunman could force his way on to a school bus. I know that is a horrible thought, but the reality exists and equally horrifying carnage could result.

We are in love with guns and violence in this country. Our movies and TV programs are filled with car chases and gun battles. People imitate what they see.

The CT State Mental Hospital is in Newtown. That is where Adam should have been confined. As for gun laws, the "Gun Free" zone really worked, didn't it? The Brady Bunch is as usual, totally incorrect, and in any case, most gun control advocates are suffering from clearly defined pathologies and are disconnected from reality. I moved to AL from CT, just to escape this sort of nonsense. Here they do not have the gun free idiocy, so lunatics should expect the locals to shoot back. I am sorry for the kids killed in CT by that state's politicians' irrational laws. Keep in mind that most of the anti-gun agitation originates with insurance companies and their desire to reduce exposure and increase profits, they just use useful idiots to promulgate their ideas.

Does anybody else think it's odd that Hurricane Sandy took a bizarre hard left hook to hit Connecticut causing devastation and then this devastation at Sandy Hook elementary in Connecticut? Just wondering.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin
"Those who surrender liberty in the name of security deserve neither"

PS: The "piece" above is editorial, not news and should be labeled as such.

I feel it is truly time for some moments of silence. There have only been funerals for two of these children. Let's give it a rest until after Christmas, think about what really should be done, and pray for those in need.

Leave the politics alone, step back for a little while, and get some clarity.

Whitley discusses compassion often and addressing peoples' needs. I cannot believe the increased divisiveness that I have seen in the last few days over gun control, the need for mental health care, etc. as being compassionate towards Newtown, when all that they really need right now is to be left alone so that they can grieve. They need love and our prayers right now.

They do not need their deceased, beautiful children to be used as political pawns before they are even buried.

Subscribe to Unknowncountry sign up now