Got to love Americans, they can't live without God and guns. Some people may find this silly, that an object of love and an object of destruction being held in the same regard, but that is the general response coming from many Americans after this month's deadly shooting that claimed the lives of 20 innocent students and 6 adults. This tragedy has brought in the supporters of both guns in schools and bringing religion back to schools.
Many people have seen and heard the statements like, If Jesus was in school, bad people with guns wouldn't be. And these statements have come from prominent U.S. leaders.
Given the fact that last week a shooting happened at a church and many more murders have taken place in churches, there is no logic in any of these statements. But that doesn't stop people from blaming the government, the president, the laws and atheists for school shootings. As the NRA proved, blame everything but the gun; after all, guns don't kill people, people kill people, right?
Wrong! The same day that 20 children were killed in a small American town, 22 children were stabbed in China. In China, none of the children died! A nut with a gun will almost always kill more people than a nut with a knife or less deadly weapon. Why did God let those children live and not the children here in America? Surely it's known Jesus isn't in Chinese schools.
Then there is the argument that if teachers have guns, there wouldn't be as many dead children because good people with guns beat bad people with guns.
Great idea! Let America add more guns around children and see what happens. When a student grabs a teacher's gun and kills the teacher along with other students, who will be blamed; the teacher, the student, or the gun?
Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons
© Christine M. Dantz 2012
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 218 ( 1 removed by Christine Dantz )
God and guns are not compatible
I do not agree. True, Guns and God are two distainctive and opposing entities, but, both are well documented as being a part of the southern culture and as unbelievable as it may sound, God and Guns are compatible within that culture.
The States of Tennessee, No. Carolina, So. Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi. Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Misourri, are all gun owner havens of paradise. States where the owning of a gun is expected and accepted as being a natural part of life.
Those states are also stalwart bastions for the Evangelical and Protestant Christian Religions. Without a shadow of a doubt, both God and Guns are in the hands, hearts and homes of the vast majority of the people who reside within these states.
The average southerner, will tell you, that Guns are a household tool, used for the purpose of providing food as well as for personal protection for the family. While God, being in the home and heart, provides comfort and soul saving assurrance to those who believe in the faith. The people's ingrained mentality on God and Guns within the southern states, is the same now, as it has been since the first immigrants settled the land. You need both in this life and therefore the two must both be held in high esteem and are compatible.
Albeit, God being a Deity of Love and Peace and Guns being weapons of destruction, one would think that the two obviously being opposing entities, could never be mentally and physically intertwined. However, in the reasoning minds of those who live in the southern states, the two go hand in hand, each providing man, what the other can not.
Good article Christine, I apologize for my comment being somewhat off topic.
For the record, I stand for gun rights. But one thing comes back at me every time I say that. And that is the number of shooting deaths in America compared with the rates in countries where it is much harder to get and keep guns.
They have chosen to sacrifice children for their hobby. How they manage to sleep nights is beyond me.
Maybe, we should take a long look at the laws of our northern neighbors who's citizens are living in a much more safe environment, than we are.
Guns may not kill people without a person's hand on the trigger, but they sure are an efficient tool for killing once you get it into your mind that this is what you want to do.
All the parents in Connecticut would certainly love to be nursing a knife wound on their child instead of grieving their sudden death at this moment.
"What is crazy is wanting our children to live in a police state,"
What is your solution? Make the penalty for possessing a gun in a gun free zone more severe?
The guns will still be around unless you plan on confiscating all of them.....Even if that were feasible we see that in Australia and England they are no more safe than before.
Again what is your solution to keeping our children safe?
I notice that you have offered no solution.
One more gun could have meant one more death, you have no way of knowing what would have happened!
It's not because there aren't any other solutions, it's because all the other solutions involve much more money on practices that will never have a guaranteed outcome (i.e., increased availability of treatment for the mentally ill). Far easier to restrict gun ownership--and banning assault weapons isn't necessarily the whole answer, either. The majority of the gun-related crimes in this country are not committed with assault weapons--and that implies that further restriction of handguns will probably be proposed at some point.
Too many people on both sides of the question are unwilling to step forward and state what they would be willing to give up in order to keep our children safe.
As far as the resistance to banning assault weapons "because we might need to form a militia and overthrow the government", I say B*LLSH*T. Our country is so stuck in 'don't give an inch' mode that no 'organization' is going to be able to get the manpower together, much less agree on a workable plan, to carry out a coup of any kind. Today's weapon of choice is cyberattack, not gunpowder. Witness what the various hacking groups have done to Westboro Baptist Church in recent days.
"HIPAA Privacy Rules for the Protection of Health and Mental Health Information"
So we can better screen people with mental health questions?
And what are you going to do between now and the time we get all of those people and their records analyzed? How are you going to protect our children from possible harm?
No Christine, like all I have seen so far who oppose protecting our children by arming employees in the schools, you bring rhetoric to the table but nothing to protect our children
Nor have you, Dan... much as you're sure you have.
It is a fact that right now at this point in time the best hope for our children's safety is from armed personnel.
fact (fækt)
— n
1. an event or thing known to have happened or existed
2. a truth verifiable from experience or observation
3. a piece of information: get me all the facts of this case
4. ( often plural ) law an actual event, happening, etc, as distinguished from its legal consequences. Questions of fact are decided by the jury, questions of law by the court or judge
You might notice that neither your name nor the word "opinion" appear in any of the definitions.
Presently 255 million guns in America. Exactly how many more guns do gun advocates feel we need to protect ourselves from the bad guys.
So Scott,
I'll pose the same question to you that I posed to Christine, one that she could not answer BTW, what is your solution? What would you do today that could protect our children tomorrow?
"My solution is to prevent it as much as possible with mental health care. Again, in all the shootings, they could have been prevented by paying attention to the people who did the shooting.
One more gun could have meant one more death, you have no way of knowing what would have happened! "
But confiscating all of the guns in America is also a "solution" it's just that it is never going to happen."Your solution" is not one that will protect our children anytime soon.
It may be sufficient for you to leave our children in harms way in the mean time...not me.
Maybe you had better re-read my post Christine,
So what you are saying is that you are willing to leave our children unprotected while you and yours go through the process of registering and banning and tracking...How long will that take? Months...Years?
Clearly, when examined factually, one must conclude that hiring Wyatt Earp will not make your schools safer, just turn them into the OK Corral.
Nothing can be done that will prevent any more mass murders from ever happening. it is not possible. You have created a society that embraces violence on many levels and armed that society to the teeth. Undoing that will take generations, not days, months or years.
What can be done now to help reduce the likelihood of mass murders from continuing at the excessive level that exists in the USA are several things:
- continue to hold "food for guns" exchanges as LA has done, to help reduce the number of guns out there;
- immediately ban large clips and excessively damaging bullets;
- immediately ban gun show sales that sidestep background checks;
- immediately ban assault weapons and any other weapon that makes rapid killing too easy;
- enact a federal gun registry and register all firearms;
- increase the level of security of background checks including criminal records and mental health records and psychological testing;
- improve mental health services for children, families and adults.
It will take a long time to bring mass murder in the USA down to the level that the rest of the developed world experiences. Nothing will ever eliminate it entirely. Arming more people will do nothing at all to prevent it.
Dan E. Dec 28, 2012, 9:24am EST
I see Rory that you can't respond with anything substantial so your just flailing about.
You meant "you're", not "your", and flailing is not so precise as my use of dictionary definitions was. Perhaps you meant some other word, who knows? Perhaps you should take some vocabulary lessons before responding further. You might come across less like an uneducated teenager emoting all over the page. But perhaps you are an uneducated teenager, how would I know?
How much safer are the people of England or Australia since they have banned weapons?
"In Columbine"
Sure Canada,
The armed guard(s) at Columbine and V Tech are kinda like our normal police force who you call and hope they can get there in time to save you...A few Armed teachers would have been preferred.
Fort Hood,
Nope, Soldiers don't carry their weapons on base.
Thanks for the lesson.
So when the next mass murder comes a calling you'd rather there were no arms in the schools to protect the children....Just making sure I understand your position.
Does it stop gun murders? well no as the 56 shooting incidents that have killed people this year in the UK can testify to, does it help in the stopping many gun incidents? yes as the 56 only incidents show.
No one will stop a determined person from killing people with guns but it sure helps to have some sort of safe gun legislation in place to stop it happening.
1 gun shooting incident in a school Scotland in 1996 none since we brought in gun bans across the whole of the UK except Northern Ireland , around 45 in schools since 1996 where America has no such ban and I have not mentioned all the other gun incidents like the one in the cinema this year.
So what country is the safest the UK that has a gun ban or America that does not?
I cant say for Australia as I don't live there and have never really coincided that country and its gun laws.
"“A 2003 study published by the Brookings Institution, found homicides “continued a modest decline†since 1997. They concluded that the impact of the National Firearms Agreement was “relatively small,†with the daily rate of firearms homicides declining 3.2%.â€"
" Over the course of a few days in the summer of 2001, gun-toting men burst into an English court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighborhood of north London. And on New Year's Day this year a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief who wanted her mobile phone.
"From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England's inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled."
Graham,
These stats don't seem to indicate that anyone in your country is any safer since the ban on weapons.
Apparently you did not notice these discrepancies, indicating perhaps that your math skills are no better than your discretion at choosing sources.
You will find that we have armed police outside Embassy's and have done for over thirty years, we also have them at all Airports other than that only the armed units at every police station are armed and these can be called out to any incident where any weapon is seen and routinely are. If any person is seen on the street with a weapon and is reported they will be dealt with by these police units.
Firearms crime in the UK.
A Home Office study published in 2007 reported that gun crime in England and Wales remained a relatively rare event. Firearms (including air guns) were used in 21,521 recorded crimes. It said that injury caused during a firearm offence was rare, with fewer than 3% of offences resulting in a serious or fatal injury.
For 2010/11, police in England and Wales recorded 648 offences as homicide, of which 58 (9%) involved the use of firearms - a rate of 0.1 illegal gun deaths per 100,000 of population. The number of homicides per year committed with firearms in England and Wales remained between 39 and 81 in the nine years to 2010/11, with an average of 58.3 per year. During the same time period, there were three fatal shootings of police officers in England and Wales, and 149 non-fatal shootings, an average of 16.5 per year.
The overall homicide rates per 100,000 (regardless of weapon type) reported by the United Nations for 1999 were 4.55 for the U.S. and 1.45 in England and Wales. The homicide rate in England and Wales at the end of the 1990s was below the EU average, but the rates in Northern Ireland and Scotland were above the EU average.
While the number of crimes involving firearms in England and Wales increased from 13,874 in 1998/99 to 24,070 in 2002/03, they remained relatively static at 24,094 in 2003/04, and fell to 21,521 in 2005/06. The latter includes 3,275 crimes involving imitation firearms and 10,437 involving air weapons, compared to 566 and 8,665 respectively in 1998/99. Only those "firearms" positively identified as being imitations or air weapons (e.g., by being recovered by the police or by being fired) are classed as such, so the actual numbers are likely significantly higher. In 2005/06, 8,978 of the total of 21,521 firearms crimes (42%) were for criminal damage.
The United Kingdom has a total recorded crime rate per capita of approximately 85 per 1000 people; the United States of America records approximately 80.
Since 1998, the number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales increased by 110%, from 2,378 in 1998/99 to 5,001 in 2005/06. Most of the rise in injuries were in the category slight injuries from the non-air weapons. "Slight" in this context means an injury that was not classified as "serious" (i.e., did not require detention in hospital, did not involve fractures, concussion, severe general shock, penetration by a bullet or multiple shot wounds). In 2005/06, 87% of such injuries were defined as "slight," which includes the use of firearms as a threat only. In 2007, the British government was accused by Shadow Home Secretary David Davis of making "inaccurate and misleading" statements claiming that gun crime was falling, after official figures showed that gun-related killings and injuries recorded by police had risen more than fourfold since 1998, mainly due to a rise in non-fatal injuries. In 2007, Justice Minister Jack Straw told the BBC, "We are concerned that within the overall record, which is a good one, of crime going down in the last 10-11 years, the number of gun-related incidents has gone up. But it has now started to fall."
In 2008 The Independent reported that there were 42 gun-related deaths in Great Britain, a 20-year low. However, in late 2009 The Telegraph reported that gun crime had doubled in the last 10 years, with an increase in both firearms offences and deaths. A government spokesman said this increase was a result of a change in reporting practices in 2001 and that gun crime had actually fallen since 2005. Chris Grayling, the Shadow Home Secretary (an opposition party spokesperson), attributed the rise to ineffective policing and an out-of-control gang culture. A 2006 statistical analysis found no measurable effect detectable from the 1997 firearms legislation.
The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London said its research also suggested the number of gun-related deaths was falling since reaching a peak eight years ago.
The centre's director, Richard Garside, said: "Gun homicide in England and Wales is low compared with such countries as the United States, Australia, France and Italy."
So it does indicate that the UK is a safer place Dan
Marilyn. So in the meantime your children have to suffer when going to school or sitting in a classroom.
Feb. 2, 1996
Moses Lake, Wash. Two students and one teacher killed, one other wounded when 14-year-old Barry Loukaitis opened fire on his algebra class
Feb. 19, 1997
Bethel, Alaska Principal and one student killed, two others wounded by Evan Ramsey, 16.
Oct. 1, 1997
Pearl, Miss. Two students killed and seven wounded by Luke Woodham, 16, who was also accused of killing his mother. He and his friends were said to be outcasts who worshiped Satan.
Dec. 1, 1997
West Paducah, Ky. Three students killed, five wounded by Michael Carneal, 14, as they participated in a prayer circle at Heath High School.
Dec. 15, 1997
Stamps, Ark. Two students wounded. Colt Todd, 14, was hiding in the woods when he shot the students as they stood in the parking lot.
March 24, 1998
Jonesboro, Ark. Four students and one teacher killed, ten others wounded outside as Westside Middle School emptied during a false fire alarm. Mitchell Johnson, 13, and Andrew Golden, 11, shot at their classmates and teachers from the woods
April 24, 1998
Edinboro, Pa. One teacher, John Gillette, killed, two students wounded at a dance at James W. Parker Middle School. Andrew Wurst, 14, was charged.
May 19, 1998
Fayetteville, Tenn. One student killed in the parking lot at Lincoln County High School three days before he was to graduate. The victim was dating the ex-girlfriend of his killer, 18-year-old honor student Jacob Davis.
May 21, 1998
Springfield, Ore. Two students killed, 22 others wounded in the cafeteria at Thurston High School by 15-year-old Kip Kinkel. Kinkel had been arrested and released a day earlier for bringing a gun to school. His parents were later found dead at home.
April 20, 1999
Littleton, Colo. 14 students (including killers) and one teacher killed, 23 others wounded at Columbine High School, Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, had plotted for a year to kill at least 500 and blow up their school. At the end of their hour-long rampage, they turned their guns on themselves.
May 20, 1999
Conyers, Ga. Six students injured at Heritage High School by Thomas Solomon, 15, who was reportedly depressed after breaking up with his girlfriend.
Nov. 19, 1999
Deming, N.M. Victor Cordova Jr., 12, shot and killed Araceli Tena, 13, in the lobby of Deming Middle School.
Dec. 6, 1999
Fort Gibson, Okla. Four students wounded as Seth Trickey, 13, opened fire with a 9mm semiautomatic handgun at Fort Gibson Middle School.
Feb. 29, 2000
Mount Morris Township, Mich. Six-year-old Kayla Rolland shot dead at Buell Elementary School near Flint, Mich. The assailant was identified as a six-year-old boy with a .32-caliber handgun.
May 26, 2000
Lake Worth, Fla. One teacher, Barry Grunow, shot and killed at Lake Worth Middle School by Nate Brazill, 13, with .25-caliber semiautomatic pistol on the last day of classes.
Sept. 26, 2000
New Orleans, La. Two students wounded with the same gun during a fight at Woodson Middle School.
Jan. 17, 2001
Baltimore, Md. One student shot and killed in front of Lake Clifton Eastern High School.
Jan. 18, 2001
Jan, Sweden One student killed by two boys, ages 17 and 19.
March 5, 2001
Santee, Calif. Two killed and 13 wounded by Charles Andrew Williams, 15, firing from a bathroom at Santana High School.
March 7, 2001
Williamsport, Pa. Elizabeth Catherine Bush, 14, wounded student Kimberly Marchese in the cafeteria of Bishop Neumann High School; she was depressed and frequently teased.
March 22, 2001
Granite Hills, Calif. One teacher and three students wounded by Jason Hoffman, 18, at Granite Hills High School. A policeman shot and wounded Hoffman.
March 30, 2001
Gary, Ind. One student killed by Donald R. Burt, Jr., a 17-year-old student who had been expelled from Lew Wallace High School.
Nov. 12, 2001
Caro, Mich. Chris Buschbacher, 17, took two hostages at the Caro Learning Center before killing himself.
October 28, 2002
Tucson, Ariz. Robert S. Flores Jr., 41, a student at the nursing school at the University of Arizona, shot and killed three female professors and then himself.
April 14, 2003
New Orleans, La. One 15-year-old killed, and three students wounded at John McDonogh High School by gunfire from four teenagers (none were students at the school). The motive was gang-related.
April 24, 2003
Red Lion, Pa. James Sheets, 14, killed principal Eugene Segro of Red Lion Area Junior High School before killing himself.
March 21, 2005
Red Lake, Minn. Jeff Weise, 16, killed grandfather and companion, then arrived at school where he killed a teacher, a security guard, 5 students, and finally himself, leaving a total of 10 dead.
Nov. 8, 2005
Jacksboro, Tenn. One 15-year-old shot and killed an assistant principal at Campbell County High School and seriously wounded two other administrators.
Aug. 24, 2006
Essex, Vt. Christopher Williams, 27, looking for his ex-girlfriend at Essex Elementary School, shot two teachers, killing one and wounding another. Before going to the school, he had killed the ex-girlfriend's mother.
Sept. 29, 2006
Cazenovia, Wis. A 15-year-old student shot and killed Weston School principal John Klang.
Oct. 3, 2006
Nickel Mines, Pa. 32-year-old Carl Charles Roberts IV entered the one-room West Nickel Mines Amish School and shot 10 schoolgirls, ranging in age from 6 to 13 years old, and then himself. Five of the girls and Roberts died.
Jan. 3, 2007
Tacoma, Wash. Douglas Chanthabouly, 18, shot fellow student Samnang Kok, 17, in the hallway of Henry Foss High School.
April 16, 2007
Blacksburg, Va. A 23-year-old Virginia Tech student, Cho Seung-Hui, killed two in a dorm, then killed 30 more 2 hours later in a classroom building. His suicide brought the death toll to 33, making the shooting rampage the most deadly in U.S. history. Fifteen others were wounded.
Sept. 21, 2007
Dover, Del. A Delaware State Univesity Freshman, Loyer D. Brandon, shot and wounded two other Freshman students on the University campus. Brandon is being charged with attempted murder, assault, reckless engagement, as well as a gun charge.
Oct. 10, 2007
Cleveland, Ohio A 14-year-old student at a Cleveland high school, Asa H. Coon, shot and injured two students and two teachers before he shot and killed himself. The victims' injuries were not life-threatening.
Feb. 8, 2008
Baton Rouge, Louisiana A nursing student shot and killed two women and then herself in a classroom at Louisiana Technical College in Baton Rouge.
Feb. 11, 2008
Memphis, Tennessee A 17-year-old student at Mitchell High School shot and wounded a classmate in gym class.
Feb. 12, 2008
Oxnard, California A 14-year-old boy shot a student at E.O. Green Junior High School causing the 15-year-old victim to be brain dead.
Feb. 14, 2008
DeKalb, Illinois Gunman killed five students and then himself, and wounded 17 more when he opened fire on a classroom at Northern Illinois University. The gunman, Stephen P. Kazmierczak, was identified as a former graduate student at the university in 2007.
Feb. 5, 2010
Madison, Alabama At Discovery Middle School, a ninth-grader was shot by another student during a class change. The boy, whose name was not released, pulled out a gun and shot Todd Brown in the head while walking the hallway. Brown later died at Huntsville Hospital.
Feb. 12, 2010
Huntsville, Alabama During a meeting on campus, Amy Bishop, a biology professor, began shot her colleagues, killing three and wounding three others. A year earlier, Bishop had been denied tenure.
March 9, 2010
Columbus, Ohio A man opens fire at Ohio State University, killing two employees and wounding one other. The shooter had recently received an "unsatisfactory" job evaluation and was going to be fired on March 13.
Jan. 5, 2011
Omaha, Nebraska Two people were killed and two more injured in a shooting at Millard South High School. Shortly after being suspended from school, the shooter returned and shot the assistant principal, principal, and the school nurse. The shooter then left campus and took his own life.
Jan. 5, 2011
Houston, Texas Two people opened fire during a Worthing High School powder-puff football game. One former student died. Five other people were injured.
Dec. 8, 2011
Blacksburg, Virginia A Virginia Tech police officer was shot and killed by a 22-year old student of Radford University. The shooting took place in a parking lot on Virginia Tech's campus.
Feb. 10, 2012
Walpole, New Hampshire A 14-year-old student shot himself in front of 70 fellow students.
Feb. 27, 2012
Chardon, Ohio At Chardon High School, a former classmate opened fire, killing three students and injuring six. Arrested shortly after the incident, the shooter said that he randomly picked students.
March 6, 2012
Jacksonville, Florida Shane Schumerth, a 28-year-old teacher at Episcopal High School, returned to the campus after being fired and shot and killed the headmistress, Dale Regan, with an assault rifle.
April 2, 2012
Oakland, Calif. One Goh, a 43-year-old former student at Oikos University, a Christian school populated by mostly Korean and Korean-Americans, opened fire on the campus, killing seven people and wounding several others.
Whats wise about all that?
Pretty much the same thing here in Australia, Graham. 34 homicides (includes murder and manslaughter) using a gun in 2010. Before the 1996 Port Arthur Massacre, guns were used in around 25% of all homicides. After new gun control laws, a gun buy-back, etc., since 2001 it's remained under 20% of all homicides (13% in 2010). Total of 260 homicides in 2010, down from 354 in 1996 and a peak of 385 in 1999.
From what I can tell, a lot of "gun rights" fetishists either just make up the crap they claim about crime in Australia, or they quote old stats, or use "violent crime" stats, which include assault, which has risen from 114,156 in 1996 to 171,083 in 2010 (down from a peak of 176,077 in 2007). I can't speak for anybody else, but I'll take getting smacked in the mouth over getting fatally shot any day of the week. Or since assault statistics include the threat of assault, I'll take being threatened with a smack in the mouth (not a particularly uncommon experience for me, personally) over being fatally shot.
No doubt some of the "gun rights" fetishists dream of the time somebody will threaten them and they'll whip out their concealed handgun, pop a few rounds into the offender, and claim they were "standing their ground", but having lived in both the US and Australia, I won't hesitate to say that I prefer living where guns, and especially handguns, are rare enough that it's almost always reasonable to assume that nobody around you is carrying one.
Since the new gun laws were introduced, gun-related homicides are down 59%. And another statistic that doesn't get talked about much is that gun-related suicides are down 74%.
Despite the often weird and unsupported claims made by people like Dan, Australia is a safer place, too.
And the NRA has Americans convinced that guns make them safer, despite oodles and oodles of evidence to the contrary. Talk about your suckers, watching their children die year in and year out and defending those responsible for the carnage after every incident.
Not long ago, homosexuality was a crime in many US states. And the KKK was the largest community organization in many states (and not just in the South). Things change. The hardcore gun nuts, much like many of the Teabaggers, white supremacists, etc., are coming across, at least to me, as increasingly desperate.
Unless you are willing to do the dirty work yourself, you're just another hypocrite, expecting people with guns to enforce your ignorant, unrealistic utopian fantasy onto other people whom you disagree with. Only, we're not interested in playing your Fascist games. I have over 120 documented raids on some of the nastiest scumbags Thug Culture can produce but I'm not going to enforce Feinstein's trampling of the Constitution she's currently trying to force on people who've never done anything wrong, and neither will anyone I work with.
Now you just go have the best day ever.
You should seriously consider changing your repulsively exhibited attitude and abnoxious vocabulary, before posting any further comments here on GN. In your comment, you displayed the mentality of a childish asinine person throwing a temper tantrum. A child seeking attention and personal recognition for the job you chose as your profession and are getting paid to do.
Regardless of what you intended with your ridiculous diatribe, as far as I'm concerned, you only achieved the displeasure of those who are seriously concerned about the problem of gun prolification and the associated gun violence in America.
Should the blame for 911 be placed upon airplanes or the Islamic terrorist who highjacked them and flew them into the twin towers?
Just as the commerical ariline companies and their airplanes, suffered the results of stricter security regulations as a result of the 9-1-1 assault on America, retail gun sellers and the guns they sell, must also suffer stricter regulations for the same reason. {i.e.} To create a safer environment for America and it's society.
A perp does not need a "weapon" to kill people.
The increase security at airports since 9-11 does not make me feel safer. Body scans and searches of the elderly and children somehow does not give me the warm fuzzies. They need to profile like Israel does, But that is another article.
Why can't Liberals have the same reaction to guns as they do with abortion.
If you don't like guns don't get one.
Also, if you don't feel safe, maybe its all the fear mongering by the mainstream media.
I feel safe when judges, congress and the executive branch of government follow the rule of law set forth by the Constitution.
"A free people not only ought to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independance from any one who might attempt to abuse them which would include their own government" - George Washington
Your logic is about as insane as many I have heard.
You really don't want me to say what I really think........Let me leave it at that.
However, that certainly was not true for Nancy Lanza. It is also not true for many Americans who buy a gun for self defense only to be very disappointed when a family member uses it to suicide. In terms of numbers, that particular syndrome is actually much more common than these occasional mass killings. Many thousands of cases per year, of buying a gun for self protection that is used for suicide by a family member.
Let's have a discussion about any medications Adam Lanza might have been on that could have contributed to his fury and killing rage.
The picture that has been so widely spread across the internet of Adam Lanza, perfect mug shot picture....But it also looks like a person who is on some seriously strong medications.
how about you look up side effects of 'psychiatric' medications, the fact that many have the side effect of suicidal tendencies.
Lets have a discussion with the drug companies, about how the medications may not help, and lets talk about if they impacted his brain and thought process sending him on a murderous rage.d.
The side effects of the psychiatric drugs are scary, I've talked to people who had loved ones start drugs and then kill themselves, or attempt suicide, when they had no suicidal thoughts before the medications, lets have that discussion as well.
As far as saying that Guns and Christians don't mix?
Strongly disagree, the whole Revolutionary War and the founding fathers of this country may who had Seminary Training, based this country on God, on Religion, on Freedoms. The British taxed and tried to take their guns, guess what a war ensued, and if the administration continues on this path, then I fear that we are going to face another revolutionary war.
People are tired of freedoms being stripped.
People are tired of the government hypocrisy that we are supposed to pretend we don't see.
It doesn't matter who sends their kids to an exclusive school, that school had armed guards before the administration sent their kids there, and they will be at that school long after the administration's kids no longer go there......
What does that say to many? Political HYPOCRITES.
What is so wrong about letting teachers carry concealed weapons? OPTIONAL Conceal Carry? Nothing in my book, if one person had a weapon that day, maybe we could have saved lives......
But to say Guns and Christians don't go together...
HOGWASH....
Now I've kept a lot of my thoughts to myself, but before we start saying guns didn't protect Nancy, there is a lot we don't know.......but even if Adam Lanza had not gone after his mothers guns, even if she didn't have any, he would have gotten them some other way, he was hell bent on going on a killing spree......Keep in mind that he tried to buy a gun, he was denied, so the regulations and safeguards of him buying a weapon worked, but it didn't stop him...
Killers are going to go for Gun Free Zones first, simply because they know they have a better chance at more destruction.
Having a police state is no better an option, because a) the kids feel like they are in a prison
b) there is no stopping at schools to protect kids, then we stretch it to malls, theaters, parks, etc, etc, etc, until everywhere we go there are armed police and military ready to strike at the slightest hint of aggression.
Right now it seems least offensive for teachers to carry a concealed gun to class.
And there could be safeguards. Put the gun in a drawer or locked place that is secured by fingerprint technology.....NO ONE but the person who has that finger/thumb print would be able to access that draw. You could make safeguards for all.
If the problem were school poisonings the solution would not be to introduce more sources of poison into the schools. If the problem were school fires the solution would not be to put additional combustible material into the school. If the problem were school roofs collapsing due to snow loads the solution would not be to increase the amount of snow on the roofs. If the problem were school drownings the solution would not be to put more pools in schools.
About as logical as all your arguments are.
Stopped by cop: 14.3
Stopped by unarmed citizen(s): 2.6
Stopped by armed citizen: 1.8
SOURCE: http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/
So how about we not dope up people who are mentally ill, that might help cut down on school shootings
You certainly could not have given any thought whatsoever to what you were going to suggest, before you wrote your last comment. If you did, then your mental reasoning is as far astray from reality, as those whom you feel should not receive mental health treatment.
Inasmuch, as it is the medication administered by mental health experts which helps to regulate the mental imbalance in those who have a diagnosed mental illness within our society.
To remove, withhold and/or cease providing that medication, would have the exact opposit results as to what you suggest. {i.e.} It is the properly prescribed and provided medication which prevents uncontrolled violent behavior and tragic incidents from occurring.
Morals have eroded. Children are not taught to respect life. Adults think it's perfectly okay to kill babies in the womb, clear up until they could be born. And we wonder why there are more crimes taking lives?
Teachers in Israel don't carry guns.
Israel actually has much more restrictive gun laws than the United States. 7 privately-owned guns for every 100 Israelis, compared to 89 for every 100 Americans. In Israel, firearm permits are required for gun ownership, and can only be obtained by security workers, people who transport valuables or explosives, residents of the West Bank, and hunters. Israelis not only have to prove that they fit into one of those categories in order to obtain their permit, they have to do so every year. 40% of applicants are rejected (link).
Teachers in Israel don't carry guns at school, Marilyn. Did you just make that up?
Shemtov said the two most critical keys to protecting schools are armed guards and armed teacher response teams. But, as in the U.S., the idea of teachers carrying guns raised some objections in Israel, he said.
“At one point the Interior Ministry mandated that a certain percentage of teachers be armed but because, over time, fewer teachers carried weapons, for a number of reasons, including philosophical objections, and due to increased terror attacks, private guards were mandated at all schools," he said.
School security in Israel is an extension of the comprehensive approach authorities there take to protecting all public places. According to National Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld, police work with the Israeli Defense Force and the private security companies that protect such places as malls, bus stations, schools and universities. A centralized command system allows for quick dissemination of intelligence to every police officer and private guard in the field, he said.
A collective effort among police, private guards and teachers requires that the civilians involved in armed security receive rigorous training. Private guards undergo at least three weeks of advanced training with a 9mm weapon and guards employed for school protection must pass criminal, mental and physical checks.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/12/30/armed-teachers-guards-key-to-school-security-in-israel/#ixzz2GYNkagNn
"A spokesperson for the Israeli Foreign Ministry told the New York Daily News that this was simply wrong. “We didn’t have a series of school shootings, and they had nothing to do with the issue at hand in the United States. We had to deal with terrorism,” he said. “What removed the danger was not the armed guards but an overall anti-terror policy and anti-terror operations which brought street terrorism down to nearly zero over a number of years.” The spokesperson added, “It would be better not to drag Israel into what is an internal American discussion.”
I would prefer to take the word of someone official in Israel, over, who was that again for Fox?
Oh, a CEO from a private company that profits from such security.
Oren Shemtov, CEO of Israel’s Academy of Security and Investigation,
No I'm not. You said "In Israel, all the teachers carry guns". Not only does the info from my source say that you're wrong, even the info from your source says that you're wrong, Marilyn.
"They were once heavily armed, then, of course, their own liberal/progressives decided that it's better to let kids be gunned down than to protect them."
It may (or may not) be true that teachers in Israel were once armed, but it's not true any more. If it's true that they were armed in the past, how many school shootings did they stop by killing the shooter?
If your unsupported claim that Israeli liberals/progressives decided that it's better to let their kids be gunned down in school shootings rather than to arm teachers to protect them, why don't you tell us how many Israeli kids have been gunned down in school shootings since the teachers stopped carrying guns? And then please also explain why the armed guards at Israeli school are so ineffectual. Didn't your source say that they all received "rigorous training"?
That is your right.
You might claim not to believe in God.
That is your choice.
However, if someone breaks into your home,
the first two thing you are going to do are:
1. Call someone with a gun.
2. Pray they get there in time.
I personally believe that God and Guns are a necessary mix.
"If you can't enforce the laws you are paid to enforce then turn in your badge and gun and get a different job. Being a lawman does not make you the law."
The Federal Assault weapons Ban was based on the California version passed prior to it. At that time an Assault weapon was defined as a fully automatic weapon. Feinstein and her thugocracy redefined Assault wepon to semi-automatic rifles. When the California law was enacted there was a huge concern that the SKS, a rifle which didn't meet any of the criteria of what the left had redefined as as an AW would be affected because it used the same round as the AK family. The BATF assured everyone the SKS was exempt. The California Attorney General gave not one, not two, but three separate press statements saying the SKS would be exempt in oder to get enough people on board. Then the law passed and AWs were outlawed with a provision that all SKS rifles would be grandfathered in, but they had to be registered and the owners had to submit all their personal info to the state. Once registration was complete, the state turned around and said "hey, we lied. All of you SKS owners are now felons. You have a tiny window to turn turn them over to us or we come get them." Now feinstein has once again redefined AWs in her newest ban. She' used the exact same language used to confiscate SKS rifle to redefine virtually every semiautomatic HANDGUN as an assualt weapon to be grandfathered, only -- surprise, surprise-- they all have to registered and recorded and the owners fingerprinted. It's the SKS all over again, in almost the exact same words. It's a gun grab, it's unconstitutional under both Macdonald vs. Chicago as well as Heller Vs DC and I'm not required to enforce unconstitutional laws. In fact I have a duty NOT to enforce laws which have been ruled unconstitutional.
Scott H.
OMFG! Your "displeasure!" We certainly wouldn't want anyone standing up to Fascism or defending basic constitutional rights if it creates any "displeasure" for you and the other hoplophobes here.
Let me be perfectly clear, as Emperor Zero is so fond of saying. If the US Congress re-instituted the Assault Weapons Ban as it was, it wouldn't actually have any effect, but I would hold my nose and enforce it since it would be a ban going forward. Feinstein's plan which would make tens of millions of law abiding people felons retroactively is a nonstarter, constitutionally speaking, and brings us right back to where I joined in. If all of us who find this power grab unacceptable turn in our badges, who's going to go and get all those guns when Dianne the Draconian declares them illegal? You?
1) OM*G
As in previous comments posted by you, I find your use of this acronym to be excessively vulgar, replulsive, ignorant and childish. Expressing such personal hatred for those who hold religious values and distain for all GN readers in general, does little to gain support for your POV.
2) If all of us who find this power grab unacceptable turn in our badges, who's going to go and get all those guns, You?
If you are in actuality a law enforcement officer, which I seriously doubt, I shutter to think, that you may be someone who has been hired to protect the people in my area. (anonymous GN profile)
As to turning in your badge, IMO, people like you have no business whatsoever having a badge to begin with, and if you do, please for the safety of all who may come in contact with you, "TURN IT IN" do not delay for even one more day, do so "IMMEDIATELY" !!!
3) when Dianne the Draconian declares them illegal?
In your paranoid state of mental reasoning, you have confused Califormia State Sen. Finestine with being God. As such, you have stated that the Senator is going to declare guns to be illegal, which is not possible regardless of what your paranoia is leading you to believe.
In reality, Sen Finestine is only a Senator and does not have the governmental authority to confiscate privately owned guns or any guns for that matter. Neither, does she have the authority to arbitrarily declare anything in government legislation. To the point, she has stated that she is considering proposing new legislation which will regulate the kind of guns which Americans will be able to purchase on the retail market. If or when, she actually submits such legislation for consideration by the full Senate, the Senate would more than likely send the proposed legislation to committee for study and recommendation. Afterwhich, the Bill would require a majority vote of 51 of all 100 Senators before it becomes law. (My error, a super majority of 60 Senators is required according to the Republicans to pass any Bill proposed by a Democrat)
Reading your comments posted here on GNP leads me to honestly believe that you are one sick and mentally confused individual, who should seek mental health assistance ASAP. I suggest this for both the general public's welfare as well as your own.
Look up "deinstitutionalization". It was pushed by liberals, and promoted by the ACLU and some mental health "professionals". At the federal level, it was initiated under President Kennedy, who felt that enforced instititutionalization of violently mentally ill people wasn't very nice. Rather than accepting responsiblity, they try to create a myth that it was all Reagan's fault.
"The NRA sees and speaks of the shiny object of total freedom, but the rest of, as onlookers, instead see the other side of what the state of nature holds: We see the peril, the danger, the blood. What protects us from the bad man with the gun is keeping it out of his hands in the first place. Or better yet, preventing him from becoming a "bad man" in the first place. There's an app for that. It's called civilisation.
There is, of course, one other purpose arms can serve in the Lockean scheme: They can support the right of revolution, if people no longer consent to the existing government, and the government ignores their wishes. But this is also at least partially an empirical question.
At the time Locke wrote, there was not an enormous technological gap between the arms of ordinary citizens and that the professional army. In fact, the Locke-era British Bill of Rights forbade a standing army without the consent of parliament, a provision which partly inspired the even more complicated set of restraints adopted by America, of which the Second Amendment - protecting state-level militias - was actually one part. Today, however, it is simply inconceivable that a civil revolt could be militarily successful in either Britain or the US."
I've seen that a few times. While militants with inferior arms to those available to the average American, no navy, armor, or air force are watching Britain and the US withdraw from a conflict they couldn't win in twelve years of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, after twelve years of fighting a segment of a population less than a sixth of Americas, even with domestic aid.
It's not only concievable, it's readily apparent. What's less likely than its success is its possibility.
Which is good.
Because Gods favour is upon the Faithful, and there are so many of the rebellious, like you. There is nothing to do with God where Evil exists. A little too deep for you and yours to understand, to be sure; try.
An all loving god will kill children because you believe I don't believe in your god.
Are you a member of the Westboro Baptist Church? If not, you should apply, it sounds like they could be friends of yours.
The only evil I see is in comments like yours.
"An all loving god will kill children because you believe I don't believe in your god." - Dantz
How sad, that the confusion that you suffer is so readily apparent if that is indeed what you've "gleaned" from my words.
Freewill. Pray for Understanding on that subject, and you'll have a Prayer to understand.
I don't think in the least that you are "evil," Dantz. Nor does that idea remotely resemble what I've said. Your coveted belief in "education" fails you, once again.
Pray for Wisdom and Understanding and those things will be given to you.
Explains this....
We have made the wrong decisions for many years and we are punishing the innocent (why should our rights be truncated for the actions of someone calling for help) and not punishing the guilty or helping the insane people who need it. If the left wants to really help kids, then why are they pro-abortion, with the exception of a few.
You can't force people to believe in a religion, nor should they be the driver's seat for your policies but you can help some things by not doing wrong as well.