Post Shooting Debate

Posted: December 19th, 2012 | Author: | Filed under: Cartoons, Connecticut Murders | Tags: , , , | 8 Comments »

8 Comments on “Post Shooting Debate”

  1. Tom Stokes said at 1:32 pm on December 19th, 2012:

    This country needs a serous discussion on mental illness, it’s early detection and proper treatment. As in any disease, early detection is the best and ultimately the best solution to an ever increasing problem in this country.

    The country also needs to discuss why there is an increase in mental health issues, from teen depression to all other, including violent, mental health issues.

    Hollywood movies which wantonly portray and glorify violence, software games which create fantasy worlds from which some never escape, social media networks which tend to increase social bullying and technology which is destroying individual’s capabilities to actually write (penmanship) letters (when was the last time you actually wrote a love letter to your sweetheart or spouse?) all help to depersonalize the individual.

    Let us also not forget that we, collectively, as a nation, have asked God to leave our schools and our public places; we have endorsed the slaughter of the unborn (eventually this will and has already cheapened life) and discuss euthanasia of the elderly infirm.

    In this extremely tragic case in Newton, involving the slaughter of innocents, contrary to reports, it appears NO “assault” rifle was used (one was found in the shooter’s car); apparently two pistols, legally purchased and owned by his mother and stolen from her, were used.

    If a car or truck had been filled with ammonia nitrate and plowed into the school building, would we be discussing the banning of cars or trucks?

    The problem comes down to the irrational actions of an individual and the inability of society to protect itself from such individuals. I believe that had this person been institutionalized that this specific act of lunacy would have been avoided.

    You cannot protect society from one deranged individual by trampling on the liberties and constitutional rights of all. It would be far better to restrict the rights of that one individual whose mental health problems were allowed to affect society so tragically.

    May God grant comfort to all those families who have lost loved ones and provide wisdom to all who seek answers to this problem.

  2. Barbara said at 4:27 pm on December 19th, 2012:

    Tom, I agree with you!!…. And while they are figuring out “What Makes Timmy Tick”…..we have a right to protect ourselves and our kids. That cartoon is interesting, but we need to remember that the 2nd amendment is a Constitutional right that cannot go into the trash can with our other Constitutional rights. Our government, democrats and republicans, trample all over our Constitution and our God given rights. What will happen when the People decide that they’ve had enough?

  3. JohnLaw said at 4:44 pm on December 19th, 2012:

    “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” What militia did this maniac belong to?

  4. Proud Republican said at 6:32 pm on December 19th, 2012:

    So I guess if some nut drove a car into a crowd of people, or took out a knife and stabbed some people the answer would be, get rid of cars and knives. How silly. If there was one person with a legal firearm in that school, he would have been taken out the minute he walked through the door. A sad state of affairs, but that’s they way it has to be.

  5. We do not need assault weapons said at 9:10 am on December 20th, 2012:

    When the second amendment was crafted over 200 years ago, the weapons they had in mind were black powder weapons and derringer-type pistols. Assault weapons weren’t even envisioned!!

    And yes “JohnLaw,” “…a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state…”

  6. Tom Stokes said at 9:30 am on December 20th, 2012:

    We do not need assault weapons said at 9:10 am on December 20th, 2012:

    “When the second amendment was crafted over 200 years ago, the weapons they had in mind were black powder weapons and derringer-type pistols. Assault weapons weren’t even envisioned!!”

    Excuse me, the weapons envisioned at that time were the same weapons that military forces used … at that time.

    The American citizens were the armed militia and had proven it rather forcefully to the British (with, of course, the aid of the French navy and army).

    The purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to allow the American citizen the right to have weapons to prevent any oppressive government, whether foreign or domestic, from encroaching on the liberties enshrined in our Constitution.

    All the liberties and rights established by our Constitution are enabled and protected by the 2nd Amendment.

  7. Reality said at 12:53 pm on December 20th, 2012:

    “What militia did this maniac belong to?”

    Newsflash to the village idiot: The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) gets to decide what the Constitution means. Your opinion — and my opinion, for that matter — isn’t worth spit. In case you missed it, the SCOTUS has ruled inHeller v. DC that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep & bear arms regardless of whether one is a member of a militia or not.

    Welcome to 2008, John Law. Do you care to express any other opinions that are absolutely irrelevant?

  8. Bob English said at 1:46 pm on December 20th, 2012:

    The problem with the arguement that this tragedy could have been prevented if only someone on the staff (the Principal?) was armed is that there are over 100,000 public schools in the US which would equate to having to put 100,000 guns into the schools that are not there now to ensure that at least one staff member was armed.

    The odds are many times higher of just one of those 100,000 guns being used to cause another tragedy than one of those 100,000 weapons preventing another tragedy.