Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Saturday, Dec. 29, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
What discussion would we be having right now across the nation if just one person inside that school was armed, trained and had stopped Adam Lanza before he could commit this horrific act? What discussion would we be having right now if Nancy Lanza had secured those weapons the way most law-abiding owners of assault weapons do?
There wouldn’t be much of any discussion in the first case and none in the second because the incident never would have happened.
It is completely understandable why someone who has not grown up within a culture of assault weapons would say that they should be banned and that there is “no good reason” for anyone to own one. I will agree that there is no good reason for anyone to own an assault weapon if they will agree that there is no good reason for alcohol or cigarettes to be legal.
There is no good reason for anyone to own a high-powered, road-race-style motorcycle capable of ungodly speeds and operate it on our public highways. More than 10 times as many people are killed every year in motorcycle accidents as by assault weapons.
But in the case of a mass shooting like Sandy Hook, it’s simply not enough to say the reason those people lost their lives was because Nancy Lanza failed to control Adam Lanza’s behavioral issues and his ability to access those weapons. Someone needs to pay; assault weapons, the NRA, video games, movies — anything but the stark reality that in our society, bad things happen to good people every single day. It’s not until something like this happens that people finally wake up and pay attention.
Chicago which has the most controlling gun laws in the Nation has over 500 murders this year
Twice in Dec 2012 in NYC people have been killed by other people pushing them in front of subway trains. Hummmm
12-24-2012 Mass murderer William Spengler killed 2 people with his "hands" and 2 with a single shot rifle and burned down 7 houses.
11-10-2012 mass murderers Monserrate Shirley, Mark Leonard, and Bob Leonard killed next-door neighbors, John Dion Longworth, and second-grade teacher Jennifer Longworth by a gas explosion that destroyed theirs and 32 other homes and put 12 others in hospital.
-----
Why is it that Liberals never ever want to hold the deranged killer responsibility.
Why is it Liberals refuse to address mental illness.
Why is it Liberals refuse to address the cultural environment of violence.
Killers will murder without guns or even if guns and clips are scarce but Liberal think that more gun control is the panacea of stopping murders.
Good points, Dan, but if I've said it once, I've said it 1,000 times: it's not about gun control. It's about control, period! The "useful idiots" on the left simply want to run our lives. They want the power to regulate everything we do, from how much water our toilets use to how big our soft drinks may be. They want to regulate our speech, our thoughts, what we eat, what we drive and how we live. At the same time, they want to deregulate every possible deviant action they can by destroying centuries old traditional values and to shred the Constitution. The enemy within is far more dangerous to our liberties than the enemy without.
Future: Does holding "the deranged killer" responsible alter the outcome of his/her actions? If "liberals" don't hold the killer responsible who does? Are "conservatives" the answer? Have "conservatives" done any more than liberals to "address the cultural environment of violence"? Leave out the usual political blame game you always seem to revert to when addressing an issue. It's not always political gamesmanship; sometimes it is a social issue that knows no political boundaries.
It is too late for this country when it comes to "gun control". If the government outlawed gun ownership tomorrow it would make no difference as there are millions of guns already out there, and there would be no effort to confiscate them (and I don't believe there should be). "Gun Control" will be a knee jerk reaction to recent events, and ultimately nothing of significance will be done.
Guns are not the problem. People are. This belief runs against the liberal agenda. Even though the facts overwhelmingly support that these insane murderers are responsible for these crimes, the real target of the liberals are guns and magazine clips. Confiscation by and mandatory selling to the government is the real liberal objective as is a gun free society. Diane Feinstein's new draft bill on gun control is just the beginning.Obama's appearance on the David Gregory NBC show this weekend to undoubtedly support Gregory's violation of DC's strict gun laws by possessing a 30 round clip on last week's Meet the Press show, are harbingers of more gun control tactics to come from the liberals.The fact that Obama's and Gregory's children attend the same school ( Sidwell Friends School) which is protected by 11 armed guards who are not secret service employees is conveniently ignored by Obama and Gregory and the liberals. The liberal hypocrisy is unbelievable. Thank the Stars for the NRA and the private owners of 300 million guns in America.
Adam Lanza failed, Nancy Lanza failed, Ryan Lanza failed, gun control failed, and still does, the culture of the country failed, mental illness assistance failed. All of it and them failed. And 26 innocent victims are dead and their friends and families will never be the same. That doesn't begin or end the toll of murders over the last 236 years. We can't stop all the unnecessary murders. But, we can surely reduce them, or make them more difficult to carry out. Especially when people, laws, regulations, and systems that are in place supposedly to protect the weakest among us, fail and don't.
CarmineD
We must go back to the laws in place in the 60s and 70s that allowed the mentally ill to be helped to control their urges to harm themselves or others
The liberal view that anyone can do what ever makes them feel good with no repercussion must stop
Vulnerable mentally ill can now anonymously act out their festering rage in social media, kill people in video games, and feel the realism in violent movies - with no repercussion. Because society does not correct them they do not feel pain or empathy and progress down a dark path.
These mentally ill individuals are further immersed everyday in a society which has lost its personal values. In our liberal secular dependency society individuals are not taught responsibility and have lost perspective of right and wrong. Underaged teens get birth control without parental supervision, marijuana drug laws are not being enforced, nudity is widespread on TV, rampant play of toxic violent video games, denigration of religious is being systematically promoted in schools, and the deranged individuals with severe mental issues can not be legally helped.
Liberals have skewed the universal balance. America liberals have beget an amoral secular culture where individual responsibility is diminished. An amoral secular America today kids are not instilled with values and ethics and do not perceive the consequences of their actions.
Guns are designed to kill quickly and efficiently while keeping the shooter's hands and trigger finger blood-free during the rampage.
Other hands will be tasked with tidying up after the carnage. And that unimaginable job usually falls to the grieving, broken communities that had the misfortune of just being there when another gun worshiper decides to go down in a blaze of gory glory.
Assault weapons are weapons of mass destruction that have no place in a civilized society. In 2003 George W Bush and the republicans were willing to invade Iraq to find WMD -- but those same republican cowards won't lift a finger here to help prevent the killing of their own people.
" Especially when people, laws, regulations, and systems that are in place supposedly to protect the weakest among us, fail and don't."
Carmine, I second your comment, the criminal element will ignore laws and bans. Example are New York and Chicago. The tightening of laws and regulation will only effect the law abiding citizens. There needs to be comprehensive changes to include all elements not just guns and gun laws.
Assault weapons are not weapons of mass destruction. Give me a break!
Wow, common sence has the loons outnumbered 8 to one today.
"Assault weapons are not weapons of mass destruction. "Give me a break!".................. There's your sign folks, clueless!
To understand why the GOP is headed for the ash heap of history, mass shootings are one of many reasons.
George W Bush and his republican rubber stamp Congress committed 120,000 US troops, eight long years and one trillion (and counting) dollars to the invasion of Iraq to find WMD that did not exist. All that in an effort to protect innocent Iraqis.
Yet those same spineless GOP cowards can't be bothered to stop the mass slaughter in their own communities by ridding our nation of assault weapons.
"Chicago which has the most controlling gun laws in the Nation has over 500 murders this year"
Some stunning statistics to go with above statement!
https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/...
I don't see many assault rifles as weapon of choice!
Hey, and the Liberal Mayor goes after pop machines? Unbelievable!
Clueless? This from @Warrior? How does a semi-auto rifle even compare to Semtex, nuclear weapons, C4, airplanes, seren gas, VX gas, and I could go on and on. Do your research on mass shootings an see how many were done by "assault rifles" vs a hand gun. The gun manufacturers designed a rifle to mimic the look of ones used by the military. To increase sales in the gun industry. This is because of the fascination of our society and war. Another example is people calling themselves a Warrior. I'm not a gun nut, but I also don't eat cheese wiz and drink kool aid.
In his initial letter Mr. Ward states "What discussion would we be having right now if Nancy Lanza had secured those weapons the way most law-abiding owners of assault weapons do?"
It appears that we are having these discussions in large part because Ms Lanza did just exactly what Mr Ward denies: she followed the existing laws governing the purchase and registration of her firearms.
In its 12/15 issue (1), the New York Times reported that "Law enforcement officials said they believed the guns were acquired legally and were registered." It appears that we are having these discussions in large part because Ms Lanza did just what Mr Ward denies - followed the existing laws governing firearm purchase and registration. Can anyone cite a more recent/more reliable source that refutes the Times?
I see a good argument, contrary to Mr Ward, that these discussions are taking place precisely because Ms Lanza DID abide by the (insufficient) existing laws. Of course, the fact that her son began his massacre by illegally killing her and stealing her firearms has no real bearing on the issue.
(1) http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/nyregi...
"By Tick Dec. 29, 2012 7:58 a.m.
Assault weapons are not weapons of mass destruction. Give me a break!"...........
Well thanks for clearing that up Tick, for a minute there I thought you saying ar15's and ak47's with 30 round clips were WMD's.
Warrior, So is it the capacity of the magazine that would label an assault rifle as a WMD? I know people who own an assault rifle who have 10 round magazines because the target shoot. Is that a WMD? I'm sure there are people who live in the mountains of Montana, on a 100 acres of land, that have an assault rifle with a 30 round magazine. Do they own a WMD? Do they need one? Because they may run into anything from wolves to bears. My long winded point is, what would classify these weapons as Weapons of Mass Destruction?
No amount of magazine capacity would classify an assult rifle or machine gun as a WMD, they are much more effective at defense, as in your home against tyranny, loons and liberals. And since you mention people in Montana on 100 acres with 30 round clips, where do you think the ATF will find them? Hunkered down out of site, that's where.
Guns are just one issue of many that has left
the teabag party in the political wilderness.
Republicans have lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections (Bush eked out a small popular vote victory over Kerry in 2004). The question is will the GOP ever again capture Electoral College votes beyond their Deep South, flat earth, bible-thumper region.
There you go, when you have nothing, stereotype. Well played Warrior, well played.
MotorSports: "The LAST thing any of the gun nuts would do is defend a harmless child."
True. When the gun crazies daydream they're pretend Rambos but when the stuff hits the fan they turn all Dick Cheney and Rush Limbauh, GOP cowards who fought tooth and nail with deferment after deferment to avoid fighting in Vietnam.
Your motorcycle analogy is flawed. You're obviously not a biker.
Nancy Lanza was trying to get him help. But he found out. He was mentally ill. This should not be a gun control debate.
Could she have called her local police station to get fast and effective help? No. She would be questioned such as "has a crime been committed?" To whom should she have turned? Answer that question, please.
"Irving Pinsky, attorney is asking to sue the State of Connecticut for $100 million on behalf of a Newtowne school survivor". - national news.
After the schools are broke, teachers refuse to instruct and the gun dealers are rich, the only system that will continue to work is the Tort system of malpractice.
The client "sustained "emotional and psychological trauma and injury" after listening to the tragedy over the loudspeakers in the classroom. This means the loudspeakers in classrooms also failed because they induced emotional trauma rather than dependable instructions on how to remain safe.
Academic instructors cannot be allowed to carry guns because that makes them responsible for successful protection of students. Should they fail, lawsuits for malpractice against the school district, State and teachers would be filed. No law can be passed that makes gun equipped teachers immune to malpractice.
Once the shooter is in the classroom, it is too late. If a shooter came in the back door of a classroom and fired, students would jump to their feet and block the view of the shooter. If the instructor tried to shoot with a quick, clear view and instead, hit a student the parents would sue. If the instructor hit nothing - they or the school system could be sued for many claims, including emotional trauma.
Guards would have to be stationed along each straight section in the halls to prevent entry. The taxpayer would be forced to pay the bills to create an environment of paranoia with the sole objective of proliferating guns. The academic environment would be ruined but the gun dealers would make millions. That turns Mainstreet USA into Afghanistan USA, but gun dealers, military equipment and bullet proof backpack suppliers rich.
The answer is very simple: make those responsible for public shootings pay. They are without a doubt, those who build and sell assault rifles for the public. Make them pay until it becomes unprofitable or financially impossible to build these pieces of deadly trash.
Toy makers are routine sued for causing injury to children. Gun makers, dealers and sellers should experience the same fate: pay for the damage they do. In that manner, they could also keep their warped sense of Constitutional guarantees.
Nobody can stop the slaughter. It is our heritage to own guns. It is our heritage to pretend that we are protecting ourselves. Second Amendment Bullshirt. That's all it is. Newtown wasn't the last massacre. Just as in Columbine we were asleep at the switch. It's going to happen again. Get the Kleenex ready.
"It is completely understandable why someone who has not grown up within a culture of assault weapons would say that they should be banned and that there is "no good reason" for anyone to own one."
Ward -- good letter! That the rest of us are facing more restrictions because some people just can't handle their freedoms is the true perversion.
"The "useful idiots" on the left simply want to run our lives. They want the power to regulate everything we do . . .At the same time, they want to deregulate every possible deviant action they can by destroying centuries old traditional values and to shred the Constitution."
lvfacts -- agree with your first bit, disagree strongly with the last. One person's "deviant action" is another's personal pleasure. As several U.S. Supreme Court decisions have clarified, restricting what consenting adults do in private is not subject to any government's legitimate lawmaking and enforcement.
"Umm let's see there were 24 trained and armed guards on duty at Virginia Tech on the day of the massacre."
MotorSports -- excellent point
"This case illustrates that tragic facts make bad law." -- Wyeth v. Levine, 129 S.Ct. 1187 (2009), Justice Alito, with whom The Chief Justice and Justice Scalia join, dissenting.
I would hope that the majority of responsible gun owners are not lumped into a big group and considered "gun nuts". I have a CCW, I obtained it after retiring from the US Army after 24 years. I was deployed a number times in combat. I carry my weapon everwhere I go that it is legal to do so. I didn't obtain a CCW so I could engage an active shooter, I did so to protect my family and myself. I don't think the majority of CCW holders obtained their permits with the hopes of facing down armed subjects at the mall. You are more likely to be mistaken by the police as a suspect than to actually take down the shooter. IF i was able to get my family to safety and the shooter was close, I would possibly engagem but I've been trained to do so. When I.m not carrying my weapon, it's locked in a biometric safe to keep it from being touched by anyone but me, to protect my childrne from any accidents. Do I believe the average person needs an AR-15, no. Do I believe in higher standards for weapons and mandatory training and periodic updated background checks, yes. If I'm labled a "gun nut", so be it, but a gun is never the first thing I would choose to resolve a conflcit, it's a tool I have at my disposal if things go horribly wrong.
KillerB, "That the rest of us are facing more restrictions because some people just can't handle their freedoms is the true perversion."
Please remember to pass that message on to the slaughtered children of Sandy Hook and the adults.
AN ASSAULT RIFLE IS A WEAPON OF MASS MURDER.
And yes, nobody needs one.
Those kids and teachers would be alive today if
the incompetent republicans had kept the assault
rifle ban in place.
We, the majority, will be the parents of these
childish republican gun nuts and place a new
ban on assault rifles and mega-clips.
We, the majority will stop the republican
madness.
"Those kids and teachers would be alive today if
the incompetent republicans had kept the assault
rifle ban in place."
So please verify where you got this bit of information from? Reid, Pelosi, Obama or are you just writing this crap because you're board?
Yes he's 'board' In the head.
Carmine D,
You said: """Adam Lanza failed, Nancy Lanza failed, Ryan Lanza failed, gun control failed, and still does, the culture of the country failed, mental illness assistance failed. All of it and them failed. And 26 innocent victims are dead and their friends and families will never be the same. That doesn't begin or end the toll of murders over the last 236 years."""
Right on. For 236 years (since 1776), America has lived and died by the gun. Beneath our peaceful exteriors, a thread of violence has been running throughout our culture. It's time for us to find another way. More guns is not the answer. The right to keep and bear arms is NOT AN UNLIMITED RIGHT (so says our conservative U.S. Supreme Court in the Heller and McDonald decisions of 2008 & 2010, respectively).