Skip to comments.The Bullying Left Exploits Sandy Hook
Posted on 12/19/2012 3:57:32 AM PST by servo1969
The horror of the massacre of innocents at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. struck at the fabric of the American tapestry. Virtually every American has spent the last few days in a haze -- shocked at the nature of evil, confused and frustrated by the inability to prevent such an atrocity, fearful at the possibility of such a monstrous occurrence repeating itself.
It is only natural in such times to discuss what we can do differently to prevent such things from happening. Nobody wants to see dead children, grieving parents or bullet-riddled schools. Nobody. We may disagree about what the proper solutions are, but we all want solutions.
So why can't those on the left admit that?
There is nothing viler than standing atop a heap of children's bodies denouncing all those who disagree politically as unfeeling monsters. Yet that is precisely what many on the left have done. Piers Morgan of CNN spent the evening of the tragedy berating gun rights advocates: "I'm so frustrated. I'm so furious that these kids have been blown away again, with legally acquired weapons. Some boy, who's got problems, takes his mother's three weapons -- including this ridiculous assault rifle -- and goes in a school and kills these kids, and you guys on the gun lobby still want to tell me the answer is more guns. It is madness!" Democratic Representative of N.Y. Jarrold Nadler accused the National Rifle Association of enabling mass murder.
This is a bully tactic, pure and simple. Labeling your opponents heartless and cruel is a strategy designed to override logic and to end the political debate.
That's the only way the left can win this debate, and they know it. Adam Lanza, the shooter, was mentally unstable. The left has thwarted serious attempts at involuntary commitment of the mentally unstable for decades. An assault weapons ban was in place in Connecticut and did precisely nothing to stop Lanza from mowing down kindergarteners. Connecticut has heavy gun registration laws. Sandy Hook Elementary was a gun-free zone, just as virtually every major mass shooting location in recent memory has been. The real solutions here lie in better protection for schoolchildren, either from armed guards or trained administrators, not in more pie-in-the-sky legislation. Lanza broke at least five laws before he even began shooting. None of them stopped him.
A real discussion of what to do about mass shootings would begin with three competing values: rights, risk and reward. First, the rights: Americans have the right to bear arms, not only for self-defense, but in preservation of a free society. The founders recognized it, and their logic is still relevant. There are societal rewards to gun ownership by responsible people, including deterrence of crime and prevention of mass shootings (an attempted mass shooting in San Antonio was thwarted by an off-duty police officer who shot a would-be perpetrator four times over the weekend, for example).
There are risks to firearms, too. They are far more powerful than knives. They have a higher capacity for damage, and they are more efficient. That's why the proper solution would be to allow responsible gun owners to keep their firearms, while preventing non-responsible gun owners -- especially the mentally unstable -- from obtaining theirs.
These decisions must be carefully calibrated. They ought not be made in haste or in the heat of passion. We ought to let Sandy Hook stir us to action -- indeed, we cannot avoid letting it do so. But we cannot let that emotion drive us into idiotic laws that violate rights and make people less rather than more safe.
But this is not a discussion the left wants to have. They are more interested in demagoguing the issue by slandering conservatives as heartless and unfeeling. That's not just insulting to conservatives. It's insulting to the murdered children, who deserve more than to be used as a political chip in an attempt to ram through an ill-conceived agenda.
Well, no. The perp killed the legal owner and took her guns.
That's why the proper solution would be to allow responsible gun owners to keep their firearms, while preventing non-responsible gun owners -- especially the mentally unstable -- from obtaining theirs.
Another example of proposing a "solution" that would not have prevented last week's tragedy.
It is also not yet known whether any public agency had been alerted that he was mentally unstable.
It's difficult to see how the "mentally unstable" can be kept from obtaining guns legally if the authorities are unaware of their condition.
I dearly wish those who propose solutions would limit them to those that would have prevented or possibly reduced last week's carnage if they had been in place.
Do we? To a committed Marxist, a few bodies that advance a totalitarian agenda is a small price to pay. Would Bill Ayers be concerned if his objectives were achieved? Would Obama? For followers who admire Castro, Mao and Stalin, this is a small crisis that cannot be allowed to go to waste.
....”Virtually every American has spent the last few days in a haze”...,,,
I am sorry, but it seems this is an all too often stated sentiment related to mass murder in the US. I am not callous, or uncaring, but I have not spent the last few days in a “haze” over this latest iteration, horrible as it was. This has happened so many times, there have been so many mass murders not only in the US but worldwide over the past 20 to 30 years, that the shock for me has been minimized. The 24 hour coverage, the groupthink exemplified by the author of this piece, the political grandstanding and hypocrisy on display, have numbed me to the horror. I listened today to the basketball coach of Syracuse University admonish Americans that this massacre is “our fault”, is the responsibility of all Americans. No, it is not. One person was at fault, responsible for the devastation - the shooter. Period. I’m sorry I feel compelled to vent this, but in the age we live now, it seems like too many are loathe to cast blame where it belongs - solely and alone. I m tired.
The lesson to be taken from this tragedy, is that the government cannot, or will not, protect the most vulnerable of it’s citizens. There was no action taken by “government” to prevent the murders of these innocents, and no action by “government” is being proposed that will do so.
This discussion needs to be focused around these facts, and only these facts.
The police cannot prevent mass murders, and the only proposals that are being put forward, remove the ability to prevent them from those who could.
Stupid, stupid, stupid!
Not only can armed citizens prevent these horrific incidents in the future, but we are the ONLY POSSIBLE SOLUTION.
You took away the need for me to post further. This herd mentality is making me sick.
Well said. Gun free zones are a big part of the problem. Anyone will ill intent knows this means that law abiding citizens will not have guns there. I feel sorry for the families of the victims, but they were killed by a mentally ill boy. The gun was only the tool he used. Place the blame on him, not the rest of the responsible law abiding gun owners. There is a reason sheep dogs have K9 teeth; they are there to protect the sheep under their mantle of protection.
I too have not been in a “haze”. I feel for the kids and families, but realize one mentally ill video game junkie is responsible for this horror.
Retail solutions for problems in education, for example, include firing inept teachers, returns to basics, tougher discipline, vouchers, etc. Support for these is limited almost exclusively to conservatives.
Wholesale solutions to education problems involve spending more money, or making changes to society so that there aren't any more poor people, etc.
In crime a retail solution is harsher and more certain punishment, while a wholesale solution is "removing the root causes."
One constant in the comparison between retail and wholesale is that the wholesale solution, if it is indeed such, require many years or even decades to have any effect, while retail "solution" can be implemented quickly.
Your "solution" is really not one of preventing such attacks. If an armed and trained shooter had been onsite in CT, he would probably not have prevented the attack, although he might have been able to limit it. Had the shooter known an armed person was onsite, he might have launched the attack anyway, or he might have diverted to a site where armed response was less likely. For example, what is to stop an armed man from shooting his way onto a school bus at a stop?
IOW, armed response does not prevent surprise attacks at all, although it can hopefully limit their severity and reduce the number of victims.
Liberals, in general, think there such attacks should be "stopped," that the chance of their occurring should be eliminated. The only way to do this is to change society by making it impossible for a nut to get his hands on a gun.
Even if such changes could be made quickly to laws, any effect is going to be very slow, requiring many years or decades to reduce the huge numbers of guns.
But liberals don't really care about that, as they are more interested in making the changes than in whether they are truly effective at working towards the stated goals.
The left are Satan’s minions.
Indeed, and easily demonstrated.
Those who love God obey his commands.
Those in opposition to God rebel, and, in the case of the left, hold the OPPOSITE values.
Demonstration of just the “horizontal” commands, 10 through 5:
10) Do not covet/envy
Leftism with its ubiquitous appeal to “fairness” and “equality” exploits envy for political power
9) Do not lie
“You’re poor because they’re rich”
8) Do not steal
It’s still as much stealing if you vote for it as if you do it.
7) Do not commit adultery (or fornicate)
No explanation necessary of the left’s view of this
6) Do not kill
Abortion and euthenasia - ‘nuff said
5) Honor/respect your parents (ancestors, tradition, etc)
The left disregards all “wisdom of the ages” in favor of their own “progressivism”.
The irony is that once the left disarms us they’ll march us to death camps and shoot us.
I don't think "irony" is quite the right word.
They'll disarm us IN ORDER TO march us to death camps and shoot us.
NOTHING will stop crazy people from being crazy, and that is the point I attempted to make. What would “stop” a person hell-bent on perpetrating an atrocity such as this with a claw-hammer? A well armed and trained citizen.
The same (and only) thing that will stop the atrocity being committed with any other weapon, guns included.
An unarmed middle-aged (or average female) teacher will not withstand a dedicated and sustained hammer attack by a motivated 20 something male, any better than they will withstand gunfire if they are not trained and equipped to defend themselves. The police, just like in the recent shooting, will arrive after far too many lives have been destroyed.
My point is this: No proposal offered so far will allow those charged with protecting these young lives while they are outside their parents care to be successful in doing so.
The only solution that I can see to mass murders of any type, in any location, will be tightly controlled return-fire by someone who is actually on the scene at the time the attack is taking place.
Again, I posit that you CANNOT stop crazy people from being crazy.
I was telling my husband the same thing the other night. I was gone, on our boat, all weekend and didn’t watch any tv then came home and was inundated. Postings all over facebook with pictures, our local Superintendent of Schools holding a prayer vigil, a group sending 1000 teddy bears, etc. I said....why does everyone feel like they need to be a part of this? Yes it was terrible but does not really impact their life yet they feel the need to be sucked in. I just don’t get it.
‘I don’t think “irony” is quite the right word.
I abbreviated the sentence. The left’s insincere demand for gun control to prevent future mass killings is the ironic part.
No. But the nut is not going to be able to catch and kill 20 kids running in all directions. It generally takes some time to reliably kill someone with a hammer (not that I have all the much experience at it), and meanwhile your intended victims are scattering in all directions.