Will our anger be buried alongside Newtown’s dead?
A flag flies at half mast on a dark, wintry night in Newtown, Conn. This week, the townspeople will bury their dead, including the bodies of 20 young first-graders murdered by an assailant who broke into their school. Coffin manufacturers have donated the 20 small caskets that will be needed in the burials. (AP)
The Bushmaster .223, the weapon used by Adam Lanza to kill 26 people at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Each victim had been shot three to 11 times, according to the coroner's report. Lanza is reported to have brought multiple 30-round magazines to the school, and at the time of his death at his own hand still possessed hundreds of rounds of ammunition.
————————————–
Robbie Parker, the father of six-year-old Emilie, has had to explain her death to her two siblings, ages 3 and 4. "They seem to get the fact that they have somebody they're going to miss very much," he said.
An excerpt from President Barack Obama’s message to Newtown and the nation, delivered at a prayer vigil Sunday night (entire text available here):
“Someone once described the joy and anxiety of parenthood as the equivalent of having your heart outside of your body all the time, walking around. With their very first cry, this most precious, vital part of ourselves — our child — is suddenly exposed to the world, to possible mishap or malice. And every parent knows there is nothing we will not do to shield our children from harm.
And yet, we also know that with that child’s very first step, and each step after that, they are separating from us; that we won’t — that we can’t always be there for them. They’ll suffer sickness and setbacks and broken hearts and disappointments. And we learn that our most important job is to give them what they need to become self-reliant and capable and resilient, ready to face the world without fear.
And we know we can’t do this by ourselves. It comes as a shock at a certain point where you realize, no matter how much you love these kids, you can’t do it by yourself. That this job of keeping our children safe, and teaching them well, is something we can only do together, with the help of friends and neighbors, the help of a community, and the help of a nation. And in that way, we come to realize that we bear a responsibility for every child because we’re counting on everybody else to help look after ours; that we’re all parents; that they’re all our children.
This is our first task — caring for our children. It’s our first job. If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right. That’s how, as a society, we will be judged.
And by that measure, can we truly say, as a nation, that we are meeting our obligations? Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children — all of them — safe from harm? Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know that they are loved, and teaching them to love in return? Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?”
I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer is no.”
————————————–
The answer is no.
————————————–
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
977 comments Add your comment
Ivan
December 17th, 2012
8:49 am
Weird. I know people that have several guns. I own a fire arm myself . And not once have we had the urge to go shoot up a school. No matter how our firearms “look”.
Maybe it’s possible the shooters, this one particularly, are absolutely crazy? Cold? Heartless?
Recon 0311 2533
December 17th, 2012
8:51 am
Jay,
You seem to be seeing the firearm as a simplistic explanation for a very complex problem. Mental illness and the external influences that cause violent behaviors in the mentally ill is far more complicated than any weapon or the accessories for any weapon.
Van Jones
December 17th, 2012
8:51 am
The Bushmaster (and the umpteen other AR-15 style guns out here) are copies of the Colt AR-15. And Colt is headquartered in CT. So blame Bushmaster if you will.
alittlecommonsense
December 17th, 2012
8:52 am
Unless something has changed in the evolving story, he left the rifle in the trunk of his car. He went inside and killed with two handguns, not the “assault rifle” in the image.
willie lynch
December 17th, 2012
8:52 am
People will place flowers and Teddy Bears at different places and declare their sorrow and outrage. And then continue to do nothing.
Ivan
December 17th, 2012
8:52 am
“It’s really a silly, silly argument. The claim that because we can’t stop all killings, we should try to stop none is ridiculous”
That’s not the argument. The argument is that you’re suggesting to take away more of a law abiding citizens rights just so you can sleep sounder under a false sense of security that no one will bring harm to you since guns are harder to get.
JKL2
December 17th, 2012
8:52 am
stands- Let’s melt down the Bushmaster web site. It’s the least we can do.
Spoken like a clueless Democrat. Would it help if we found the company that sold him the mask he wore and put them out of business too? Would that make you feel better?
Power to the sheeple!
Thomas Heyward Jr
December 17th, 2012
8:53 am
Well somebody obviously thinks Drones look mighty sexy too.
.
I have no idea where they buried those little Paki kids……………nor do the hipocritical agenda-driven false leftys.
.
http://beta.photobucket.com/images/predator%20drone/
Jay
December 17th, 2012
8:53 am
“Its pretty ironic to see Deomcrats calling to restrict the very same types of firearms that Obama allowed to walk across the border to Mexican drug cartels. Obama doesnt have a leg to stand on.
The sole reason that the NRA and others on the right have made such a big deal about Fast and Furious is out of hope that by doing so they could cripple the hated BATF, the federal agency empowered to enforce federal gun laws. They hoped that by making a big deal out of a sting operation gone very much awry, they would be able to shut down all such sting operations in the future.
As an example of the NRA’s hypocrisy, note how they drop the whole “guns don’t kill people” mantra in discussing Fast and Furious. In that single case, they are quite willing to argue that guns killed people.
Keith
December 17th, 2012
8:54 am
We do have evidence of what happens when guns are banned.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm
A new study suggests the use of handguns in crime rose by 40% in the two years after the weapons were banned.
So make more laws for criminals to violate? Whats the point in that?
Keith
December 17th, 2012
8:55 am
The sole reason that the NRA and others on the right have made such a big deal about Fast and Furious is out of hope that by doing so they could cripple the hated BATF, the federal agency empowered to enforce federal gun laws. They hoped that by making a big deal out of a sting operation gone very much awry, they would be able to shut down all such sting operations in the future.
As an example of the NRA’s hypocrisy, note how they drop the whole “guns don’t kill people” mantra in discussing Fast and Furious. In that single case, they are quite willing to argue that guns killed people
WRONG. Or have you forgotten the murder of Brian Terry? Doesnt that matter to you at all? Why do you find that acceptable?
Ivan
December 17th, 2012
8:55 am
“You seem to be seeing the firearm as a simplistic explanation for a very complex problem. Mental illness and the external influences that cause violent behaviors in the mentally ill is far more complicated than any weapon or the accessories for any weapon”
This. Since healthcare in our country is closer to a government responsibility now, I can see mandatory health screenings, including psychiatric screenings in the future.
Jay
December 17th, 2012
8:56 am
“Unless something has changed in the evolving story, he left the rifle in the trunk of his car. He went inside and killed with two handguns, not the “assault rifle” in the image.”
Again, incorrect. He left a shotgun in the car. He took the Bushmaster with him, and he used that weapon to pump three to 11 bullets into every one of his victims.
Thomas Heyward Jr
December 17th, 2012
8:56 am
And Adam Lanza’s mother didn’t put a gun to my head (or threaten it) and compel me to buy her guns.
.
unlike………………………………
HDB
December 17th, 2012
8:56 am
The problem here is that it’s cheaper to buy a gun than it is to get medical attention for mental issues; it’s cheaper to buy bullets than it is to seek medical attention for physical and mental issues; maybe if the nation places a better premium on health issues and destigmatizes mental health issues, some of these people would seek the help they need!!! MAny of these people who lash out and massacre are severely depressed….and feel they have no way out!!!
bookman parrot
December 17th, 2012
8:56 am
i’m 100% pro 2nd Amendment, but do not have a problem with limiting magazine capacity to say 12 to 15; no problem with mandatory waiting period of a few days; reasonable background checks… cool with that as well… but much of this is already in place… not saying it can get better … but i hate to say it, terrible days will continue to occur until people and society are less violent and actually care about life; removal of guns from the average responsible owner is not the answer.
Morality?
December 17th, 2012
8:56 am
Drugs have been proven to genetically alter the brain – autism, brain disorders, paranoia, insanity are on the increase because of the mother’s and father’s of soon to be born children irresponsible use of drugs. We have all of these new autoimmune diseases, autism, blood disorders, cancer, etc and wonder where all these diseases that did not exist a few years ago but prevalent with us today come from? Crack, coke,meth,heroine Rx drugs are responsible. Yes as Obama said “We can not put up with this anymore”. I say it is time to go to the source – illegal drugs – most of which are entering the country through Mexico – to be dealt with more harshly. Time for the death sentence for Heroin, coke and meth dealers. Those selling death and destruction to our children must be stopped NOW. No need to house and feed them – quit coddling these murderers. DEATH SENTENCE is what they are handing out to our children and DEATH SENTENCE is what they deserve, Six months to trial and six months to the NEEDLE. NO more waiting 18 years to eliminate this plague.
TaxPayer
December 17th, 2012
8:56 am
Joshua_Linskey
December 17th, 2012
8:24 am
Dear Tax Payer,
You’re an idiot and obviously one of the “a” holes. That is not an opinion, it’s an observation, hence the reason I declared you an idiot.
Thanks for reaffirming your opinion, Joshua.
JDW
December 17th, 2012
8:57 am
@alittlecommonsense…indeed you seem to be behind the curve…
“Connecticut State Police Lt. J. Paul Vance, speaking at an afternoon news conference, said “the weapon that was utilized most of the time during the crime was a [.223 caliber] Bushmaster rifle.”
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/12/16/167379387/obama-to-visit-conn-town-reeling-from-school-shooting
indigo
December 17th, 2012
8:57 am
@indigo – 8:43
What are you talking about?
What in THE WORLD are you trying to say?
willie lynch
December 17th, 2012
8:57 am
alittlecommonsense
December 17th, 2012
8:52 am
According to a report I read all the weapons were found near the shooter. This was released after the initial flurry of “information”.
I read the book Columbine which shed a great deal of light on the reactions of people after this kind of tragedy and one of it’s main cautions was to wait, we don’t know much of anything right now.
independent thinker
December 17th, 2012
8:57 am
Bushmaster +other assault weapons + plenty ammo + dysfunctional 20 year old son who is antisocial and feels no pain and mother who worships guns instead of religion + absentee father who ran off with new wife = mass shooter.
Anybody want to challenge that theory?????????????
Oh yeah the guns have nothing to do with those children being killed.
Welcome to the Occupation
December 17th, 2012
8:58 am
The sign of a deeply diseased social order. Sick unto death.
JKL2
December 17th, 2012
8:59 am
skip- Your child’s life or the right to fire 30 rounds in 2 seconds, you choose
Last I checked, his rifle had the same rate of fire as the pistols he was carrying. One bulltet per trigger squeeze.
Personally I think we would be better off with simple hand guns: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piXoF3JGhYM
Corbin Sharpe. Baby Boomer...and Ban the Gun Thug!
December 17th, 2012
8:59 am
Michael
December 17th, 2012
8:47 am
Amen! And welcome home, Brother.
Keith
December 17th, 2012
8:59 am
How often have the gun control groups helped out the families of slain police officers?
Law Enforcement Officers, that are NRA members, killed in the line of duty will have $25,000 in coverage.
I havent seen gun control groups doing anything to support these families.
Just Saying..
December 17th, 2012
9:00 am
Enough.
Jay
December 17th, 2012
9:01 am
I don’t find that murder acceptable, Keith.
I also don’t see what in the hell it has to do with the Newtown shootings and the issue under discussion here.
Keith
December 17th, 2012
9:02 am
Again, incorrect. He left a shotgun in the car. He took the Bushmaster with him, and he used that weapon to pump three to 11 bullets into every one of his victims.
What is your source for that? I saw the law enf statement that they were not commenting on what weapons used. Have they updated that statement?
indigo
December 17th, 2012
9:02 am
Brosephus – 8:42
I agree we should focus on curtailing the demand for drugs.
I also think we should focus on curtailing the demand for guns.
But, I suspect doing either or both will be about as sucessful as getting Israel and Palestine to live in peace.
Ison12
December 17th, 2012
9:02 am
Would it be safe to say the vast majority of Americans have never seen that ad? Yes.
Would it be safe to say the vast majority of Americans who have seen that ad have never engaged in a massacre by gun? Yes.
Perspective people, perspective.
newkid
December 17th, 2012
9:02 am
With a gun culture older the the country itself, it’ll take the nation another 100 years to rid ourselves of this menance even if we were to start today. So, much to our misfortune, we’ll likely replay the dreadful experience of last Friday many more times before we right our course.
As we begin the difficult discussion of how to fix this gun sickness while being honest with ourselves about what motivated so many of our past and present national policies, shouldn’t we ask if the solution lies – at least partially – in finding a way to make it profitable for a few corporations to engage in the enterprise of ridding the nation of menacing assault weapons? If a group of policy wonks could devise a means by which a select few corporations could make hundreds of millions in profit annually through the ridding the nation of these death machines, then our Congress would undoubtedly and immediately jump at the opportunity to enact enabling legislation and provide a host of tax incentives to encourage said corporations to put things right. Perhaps it speaks volumes about us, but much about our history ought to make it clear that our way forward on this issue rests at least partically in exploiting that profit motive that rests at the base of so much of what we do well.
Brosephus™
December 17th, 2012
9:03 am
Its pretty ironic to see Deomcrats calling to restrict the very same types of firearms that Obama allowed to walk across the border to Mexican drug cartels.
Not as hilarious at the ignorance on display from people who post such stuff. If Arizona purchase laws weren’t so weak, the gun purchases would have never been made in the first place.
fair and balanced
December 17th, 2012
9:04 am
” A WELL REGULATED MILITIA BEING NECESSARY FOR THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE”
PURE GARBAGE by incompetent out of touch framers of the Constitution according to Antonin Scalia and four activist Justices.
How did those god given fundamental rights SCOTUS gave us to own any gun for any purpose work on Friday for the citizens of Connecticut?????????????????????
Keith
December 17th, 2012
9:05 am
You are the one that stated the NRA only cared about using FF to end stings. The fact a man was murdered by weapons Obama provided is pertinent to this discussion when his party is now calling for restrictions of those very same weapons. Do they are fine to be used to kill in Mexico by drug dealers but not legally owned here???? Is that your argument?
JKL2
December 17th, 2012
9:05 am
Keith- So make more laws for criminals to violate? Whats the point in that?
I think we should require criminals to request a permit. That way the police will already have their DNA, fingerprints, and pictures on file before they start committing crimes. That will make catching them easier too. Then when they commit a crime without the proper permit, we can charge them with that crime too!
I’m sure that will solve our problem…
Steve
December 17th, 2012
9:05 am
Moralty? You make no sense. All of these problems have always existed, and we don’t have autism because of people doing cocaine.
Some of the things I read in here…wtf
Doggone/GA
December 17th, 2012
9:05 am
“As we begin the difficult discussion of how to fix this gun sickness ”
There is no “gun sickness”, but there are sick people with guns.
Welcome to the Occupation
December 17th, 2012
9:06 am
The mother of Adam Lanza, the gunman who killed 20 children and six adults in one of America’s worst ever school massacres, was a “survivalist” preparing for economic and social collapse, it has emerged.
According to reports, Nancy Lanza was a so-called ‘prepper’, a part of the survivalist movement which urges individuals to prepare for the breakdown of society by training with weapons and hoarding food and other supplies.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mother-of-sandy-hook-school-gunman-adam-lanza-was-a-prepper-survivalist-preparing-for-economic-and-social-collapse-say-reports-8422298.html
Jerome Horwitz
December 17th, 2012
9:06 am
Until we can figure out a method to keep these types of weapons out of the hands of the disrubed there needs to be regulation. Other nations have it – why can’t the US?
RB from Gwinnett
December 17th, 2012
9:07 am
The next one of these is fully on the heads of the media who will not stop giving these nutcases exactly what they want, fame. I think pretty much everybody will agree, it’s not 20 dead children this nutcase was after, it’s exactly what’s happening in the media he was after. And he’s getting it.
And the next one is going to “one-up” this one with an attack even more outrageous. And they’ll make him famous too.
TaxPayer
December 17th, 2012
9:07 am
Guns rights supporters are clearly willing to support whatever others feel needs to be done so long as their 2nd amendment rights trump the lives of six year olds and they are not asked to be more responsible or to pay for added security, etc. At least they have not asked for another tax cut in exchange for the undue stress they’re suffering due to additional calls for more gun controls. We should be thankful.
Brosephus™
December 17th, 2012
9:07 am
I suspect doing either or both will be about as sucessful as getting Israel and Palestine to live in peace.
If you never put forth the effort to try, you’ll never be successful at doing what you didn’t set out to do.
Keith
December 17th, 2012
9:07 am
Not as hilarious at the ignorance on display from people who post such stuff. If Arizona purchase laws weren’t so weak, the gun purchases would have never been made in the first place.
How do you figure that? What would have prevented the shooters mother from buying the weapons? You are aware that there are many laws that the shooter was violating by having the guns at the school. I doubt another law wouldve stopped him.
Recon 0311 2533
December 17th, 2012
9:08 am
Banning guns or certain types of guns and restrictions on magazine capacity or ammunition are all overly simplistic solutions that won’t solve the problem. With tens of millions of guns in the general population all banning would do is create an underground of black market distribution for firearms and related accessories. Guns would still get into the hands of the criminal and the criminally insane.
Doggone/GA
December 17th, 2012
9:08 am
“Until we can figure out a method to keep these types of weapons out of the hands of the disrubed there needs to be regulation”
How do you suggest we identify the “disturned” who should not have guns? Serious question, what’s your suggestion?
godless heathen - fiscal cliff dweller
December 17th, 2012
9:09 am
Cou9ldn’t turn on the TV this weekend without seeing something about the Ct. massacre, occasionally interrupted by ads for the Quentin Taratino movie, Django. Three or folks are shot, in the commercial.
Steve
December 17th, 2012
9:09 am
In truth, there is no rational argument for guns in this society. This is no longer a frontier nation in which people hunt their own food. It is a crowded, overwhelmingly urban country in which letting people have access to guns is a continuing disaster. Those who want guns—whether for target shooting, hunting or potting rattlesnakes (get a hoe)—should be subject to the same restrictions placed on gun owners in England—a nation in which liberty has survived nicely without an armed populace. […]
Michael Crichton makes an interesting argument about technology in his thriller “Jurassic Park.” He points out that power without discipline is making this society into a wreckage. By the time someone who studies the martial arts becomes a master—literally able to kill with bare hands—that person has also undergone years of training and discipline. But any fool can pick up a gun and kill with it.
“A well-regulated militia” surely implies both long training and long discipline. That is the least, the very least, that should be required of those who are permitted to have guns, because a gun is literally the power to kill. For years, I used to enjoy taunting my gun-nut friends about their psycho-sexual hang-ups—always in a spirit of good cheer, you understand. But letting the noisy minority in the National Rifle Association force us to allow this carnage to continue is just plain insane.
Molly Ivins
Common Sense
December 17th, 2012
9:10 am
Yet you ignore the anger from those that carry weapons to the government, who guarantees that those charged to protect kids in schools during the day ar fully disarmed.
Columbine: Gun Free Zone
Va Tech: Gun Free Zone
Ft. Hood: Gun Free Zone
Aurora: Gun Free Zone
Newtown School: Gun Free Zone.
And why did the shooting at the Oregon Mall not turn into a massacre?
An individual carry concealed merely confronted the shooter, who then terminated himself rather than face any threat.
Yet all of this is ignored.
Is the Gun Free Zones that have failed. It’s the constant call for more gun control that has failed.
And the flawed logic prohibits an honest conversation on this.
We did not do everything we can do to protect the kids.
Because the first thing to be done would not be to disarm their protectors.
godless heathen - fiscal cliff dweller
December 17th, 2012
9:10 am
Thanks for the Bushmaster image. Putting it on my desktop.
Thomas Heyward Jr
December 17th, 2012
9:10 am
Teaching young ,innocent, easily influenced minds to blindly trust gun-carrying Government authority figures has……………………………….destroyed more of our children’s lives than guns have.
Steve
December 17th, 2012
9:11 am
The Hartford Courant Editorial Board writes ‘We Have To Change’ — It’s About Time:
To get guns under control, we start with laws. Sen. Richard Blumenthal and Sen.-elect Chris Murphy acknowledged Sunday that “people want us to do something.” Correct. The Connecticut delegation should introduce a bill to go after the relatively obvious and reasonable steps: assault weapons ban, universal background checks, no high-capacity magazines. The National Rifle Association leaders will object. To hell with them. The right to public safety trumps the right to own an arsenal.
JohnnyReb
December 17th, 2012
9:11 am
I bought a 9MM handgun just after Obama won the election in 08. It’s still in the box, never fired. I intend to buy a semi-automatic rifle, probably not a Bushmaster but something similar before Progressives successfully outlaw them. Like the handgun, it will probably collect dust. Neither will ever be taken from me as long as I have breath.
I mourn for the children and others in this senseless tragedy.
I shake my head in utter disbelief that time after time the Left thinks they can use the government to fix failures of personal responsibility. And, are so eager to give up rights guaranteed by the Constitution on which our great country has thrieved. The Constitution that was expressly and specifically written to protect citizens from government yet they continually find it lacking although without they would probably have suffered the fate well recorded in the history of many other nations.
There is a lot yet to be learned of the shooter and family. Initial reports are very telling. I suggest attention be turned to that as lesson instead of drumming up support so that other peoples rights can be taken away.
Welcome to the Occupation
December 17th, 2012
9:12 am
As usual, the conservatives and liberals are both wrong in their own head-in-the-sand ways, though it must be said the conservatives, as usual, are wrong in their usual diseased way, looking out over a scene of slaughter and telling themselves things are just fine, that this really is the best we can do as they whistle to themselves nice sweet ideological nothing rather than being willing to take the measure of a sick social order.
But the ‘band aid’ approaches of the liberals aren’t much better either. Gun control measures alone, not even with heavy doses of mental health treatment, won’t address the situation either. This too far advanced for that. This goes way beyond the simple fact that our culture is literally engulfed with weapons, though that is one of the primary symptoms of course.
No, this is going to take something far more profound, something more like an outright social revolution.
Steve
December 17th, 2012
9:12 am
@CommonSense – the Oregon Mall situation was minimized because the shooter’s gun JAMMED.
skipper
December 17th, 2012
9:16 am
I know it seems kinda politically incorrect to address certain mentally disturbed folks as “loons” but in most of these shootings, that is what you have. The shooter in the theatre was a nut-job..period. The shooter at Va. Tech was a nut-job….period. The kid that just did this shooting in Newton was a nut-job…..period. To hell with “mentally disturbed- mentally challenged” and all the other feel-good terms. These creeps were PURE FRICKIN’ NUT JOBS! I do not know how to weed them out of society, or how to predict this type of behaviour. This is in no way a bad reflection to the mildly mentally disabled or other folks. But, once again, these folks were LUNATICS…..a danger to society. I know it would be impossible to predtict who would do stuff like this, but that may need to be the focus.
alittlecommonsense
December 17th, 2012
9:16 am
“The sole reason that the NRA and others on the right have made such a big deal about Fast and Furious is out of hope that by doing so they could cripple the hated BATF, the federal agency empowered to enforce federal gun laws. They hoped that by making a big deal out of a sting operation gone very much awry, they would be able to shut down all such sting operations in the future.”
Or maybe it could be the fact that our government sold over 2000 of these assault rifles to ultra violent Mexican drug cartels. No, of course it’s just politics right Jay?
Keith
December 17th, 2012
9:17 am
Demonizing the NRA does nothing to help the situation. I still have not heard one thing the gun control groups have done for the law enforcement officers out there putting their lives on the line for our safety. Its pretty easy to show you what the NRA does:
http://le.nra.org/
The Law Enforcement Division (LED) of the NRA was established in 1960 specifically to provide the law enforcement community with a means to certify law enforcement firearm instructors. Over the last 50 years, we have trained more than 55,000 law enforcement firearm instructors and currently have over 11,000 active certified instructors.
independent thinker
December 17th, 2012
9:17 am
Welcome to the Occupation ;December 17th, 2012;9:06 am:
“”"”"”"”"The mother of Adam Lanza, the gunman who killed 20 children and six adults in one of America’s worst ever “massacres, was a “survivalist” preparing for economic and social collapse, it has emerged.”"”"”"”"”"”"”
EXCELLENT POST
How many of the racist antiObozo crowd have bought the NRA sales campaign and armed themselves to the teeth believing the second amendment gives us a fundamental right to combat tyranny by that black Commie Muslim??????????????
TaxPayer
December 17th, 2012
9:18 am
Have the gun rights advocates, NRA, others, issued their recommended guns for six year olds to tote yet. Surely some of you have studies showing that a six year old can safely unload a 10-clip magazine from a glock or something. Our children need answers now so they can be prepared to protect themselves. And they need to be affordable for that market. Remember these kids have small piggy banks.
Steve
December 17th, 2012
9:18 am
Lunatics will always try to inflict harm, but removing easy access to the most destructive weapons is the first step towards bringing these numbers down. Period. This is common sense. Again, I’ll say it again, but common sense is something that seems to allude so many of you on the far “Right.” You know, people like yourselves that still think Jesus walked with the Dinosaurs and Obama is a Muslim.
Granny Godzilla
December 17th, 2012
9:19 am
Let’s be real.
DEMONIZING THE NRA is a great place to start.
Keith
December 17th, 2012
9:20 am
All these shootings are in gun free zones. So what is the solution? Make the entire country a gun free zone? Ludicrous. If gun bans reduced crime then crime in the UK would have dropped. It didnt.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 17th, 2012
9:22 am
HEADLINE (AJC): “Crime comes to Beltline; security to be upgraded”
Notice something about that headline? Security always get “upgraded” AFTER a tragedy.
Jerome Horwitz
December 17th, 2012
9:23 am
Doggone – I just don’t know. More vigilance by parents, teachers, peers? Better mental health options? Here’s an interesting link to a mother’s frustration. I wish I had an answer.
http://gawker.com/5968818/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother?fb_action_ids=4620806512388&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582
godless heathen - fiscal cliff dweller
December 17th, 2012
9:24 am
Can anyone cite an NRA ad, program, column that promotes “survivalist” preparation for economic and social collapse??
Welcome to the Occupation
December 17th, 2012
9:24 am
JohnnyReb: “I bought a 9MM handgun just after Obama won the election in 08. It’s still in the box, never fired. I intend to buy a semi-automatic rifle,”
Why on earth did you do something like that? That’s about the silliest thing I’ve every heard. JohnnyReb versus the drones! Anybody want to take odds?
So you’re admitting basically that you’re a bit of a paranoid delusional nut?
“There is a lot yet to be learned of the shooter and family. Initial reports are very telling”
Yeah, and the real irony is that the Lanza family by all accounts were looking at things a lot like you do, JohnnyReb, just a tad more extreme.
Keith
December 17th, 2012
9:25 am
So now its crazy to prepare for disasters.
jconservative
December 17th, 2012
9:26 am
Maybe a challenge the whole gun/violence culture needs to be made through the Federal court system.
For example:
The 14th Amendment states that “No state shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The State of Connecticut protected the 2nd Amendment Constitutional right of its citizens to “keep and bear Arms”. The AR-15 and the 30 round clips are legal in Connecticut.
The State of Connecticut did not provide those 20 dead kids “the equal protection of the laws”.
The State requires that parents educate their children. Yet the State did not provide for the safety of those children in a State mandated school. Those children were entitled to the Constitutional right to the “equal protection of the laws”.
Which is the ultimate right? The right to “keep and bear Arms” or the right to “the equal protection of the laws”? Both are in the Constitution. Is their a middle ground? Can we observe both rights?
As Justice Scalia noted in his majority decision in District of Columbia v. Heller: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” (The case is # 07-290 for those wanting to read it).
My question is “Are 30 round clips protected by the Constitution”?
You know in the last 11 years we have spent almost a trillion dollars to keep Islamic terrorist from killing more Americans. But we have not spent a dime to keep domestic terrorists from killing their fellow Americans.
Obama is correct on this issue, it is past time for a discussion on domestic violence.
barking frog
December 17th, 2012
9:26 am
Columbine to Newtown, no gun or ammo has been banned.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 17th, 2012
9:26 am
Too bad we can’t get the assault guns off the market. “Handguns is made for killing, ain’t no good for nothing else…” Wish we could get all of them but that won’t happen…
People say people kill people….I say without guns it would be difficult to kill on a mass scale without bomb making capacity. Home invasions affect about 3% of homes in US…I note that there are 310,000,000 non-military guns in private ownership in the US…
Why do people need them? If so, why not keep them at a gun club? Too late for pontificating on this as we all know we can’t confiscate..
saywhat?
December 17th, 2012
9:27 am
Repeal the second amendment. Its obsolete. Enact strict gun laws and over a long period of time the ridiculous number of guns currently available will start to dwindle, until one day 20 years from now, or longer, the number of annual gun deaths will be cut in half much as drunk driving deaths have.
Doggone/GA
December 17th, 2012
9:27 am
“I wish I had an answer”
We all do, but instituting “solutions” that are no such thing only foster a false sense of security. Yes, there are things we can do to make access to some guns more difficult…but it does no one any good to hide our heads in the sand and pretend we can prevent such tragedies altogether. Because we can’t.
Keith
December 17th, 2012
9:27 am
If its crazy to prepare for disasters guess we should go ahead and terminate FEMA, The Red Cross and other organizations that prepare to deal with them.
jose
December 17th, 2012
9:29 am
Why is it, Jay, that you always settle short of what is needed? Sure, we need to take a closer look at gun laws. But, changing gun laws is but a first step. The REAL issue here isn’t just guns, it is MENTAL HEALTH. There was something mentally wrong with the shooter and those types of problems don’t emerge overnight. His family had to have known something was wrong with the guy, but like most families, they probably struggled with what to do, just like the family of the workplace shooter in Minnesota in October and the grad student who shot up the theater in Colorado. Simply banning guns may make it more difficult for these individuals to harm themselves and others, but these cases will continue until the U.S. treats mental health disorders as a disease and not an afflication that can somehow be ignored or talked away.
stands for decibels
December 17th, 2012
9:30 am
Firs this:
According to reports, Nancy Lanza was a so-called ‘prepper’, a part of the survivalist movement which urges individuals to prepare for the breakdown of society by training with weapons and hoarding food and other supplies.
and then this:
I bought a 9MM handgun just after Obama won the election in 08. It’s still in the box, never fired. I intend to buy a semi-automatic rifle, probably not a Bushmaster but something similar before Progressives successfully outlaw them. Like the handgun, it will probably collect dust. Neither will ever be taken from me as long as I have breath.
Guns kill people.
/drive-by
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 17th, 2012
9:30 am
Welcome to the Occupation
December 17th, 2012
9:24 am
Good god man…don’t you know that it’s easier to get him a deer with such fire power? Probably get more than one fowl to a clip…a real challenge eh?
Seriously, I think regarding a home invasion, most homeowners would hesitate to shoot another human…that hesitation is likely deadly…
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
December 17th, 2012
9:31 am
A brief history of Gun Control In America:
America’s history of regulating private ownership of firearms goes back much farther. In fact, all the way back to…
1837
Georgia passes a law banning handguns. The law is ruled unconstitutional and thrown out.
1865
In a reaction to emancipation, several southern states adopt “black codes” which, among other things, forbid black persons from possessing firearms.
1871
The National Rifle Association (NRA) is organized around its primary goal of improving American civilians’ marksmanship in preparation for war.
1927
Congress passes a law banning the mailing of concealable weapons.
1934
The National Firearms Act of 1934 regulating only fully automatic firearms like sub-machine guns is approved by Congress.
1938
The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 places the first limitations on selling ordinary firearms. Persons selling guns are required to obtain a Federal Firearms License, at an annual cost of $1, and to maintain records of the name and address of persons to whom firearms are sold. Gun sales to persons convicted of violent felonies were prohibited.
1968
The Gun Control Act of 1968 – “…was enacted for the purpose of keeping firearms out of the hands of those not legally entitled to possess them because of age, criminal background, or incompetence.” — Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms The Act regulates imported guns, expands the gun-dealer licensing and record keeping requirements, and places specific limitations on the sale of handguns. The list of persons banned from buying guns is expanded to include persons convicted of any non-business related felony, persons found to be mentally incompetent, and users of illegal drugs.
1972
The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms is created listing as part of its mission the control of illegal use and sale of firearms and the enforcement of Federal firearms laws. ATF issues firearms licenses and conducts firearms licensee qualification and compliance inspections.
1977
The District of Columbia enacts an anti-handgun law which also requires registration of all rifles and shotguns within the District of Columbia.
1986
The Armed Career Criminal Act (Public Law 99-570) increases penalties for possession of firearms by persons not qualified to own them under the Gun Control Act of 1986.
The Firearms Owners Protection Act (Public Law 99-308) relaxes some restrictions on gun and ammunition sales and establishes mandatory penalties for use of firearms during the commission of a crime.
The Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (Public Law 99-408) bans possession of “cop killer” bullets capable of penetrating bulletproof clothing.
1989
California bans the possession of semiautomatic assault weapons following the massacre of five children on a Stockton, CA school playground.
1990
The Crime Control Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-647) bans manufacturing and importing semiautomatic assault weapons in the U.S. “Gun-free school zones” are established carrying specific penalties for violations.
1994
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Public Law 103-159) imposes a five-day waiting period on the purchase of a handgun and requires that local law enforcement agencies conduct background checks on purchasers of handguns. (ATF’s Brady Law web site.)
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-322) bans all sale, manufacture, importation, or possession of a number of specific types of assault weapons.
1997
The Supreme Court, in the case of Printz v. United States, declares the background check requirement of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act unconstitutional.
The Florida Supreme Court upholds a jury’s $11.5 million verdict against Kmart for selling a gun to and intoxicated man who used the gun to shoot his estranged girlfriend.
Major American gun manufacturers voluntarily agree to include child safety trigger devices on all new handguns.
1998 – June
A Justice Department report indicates the blocking of some 69,000 handgun sales during
1977 while Brady Bill pre-sale background checks were required.
1998 – July
An amendment requiring a trigger lock mechanism to be included with every handgun sold in the U.S. is defeated in the Senate.
But, the Senate approves an amendment requiring gun dealers to have trigger locks available for sale and creating federal grants for gun safety and education programs.
1998 – October
New Orleans, LA becomes the first US city to file suit against gun makers, firearms trade associations, and gun dealers. The city’s suit seeks recovery of costs attributed to gun-related violence.
1998 – November 12
Chicago, IL files a $433 million suit against local gun dealers and makers alleging that oversupplying local markets provided guns to criminals.
1998 – November 17
A negligence suite against gun maker Beretta brought by the family of a 14-year old boy killed by an other boy with a Beretta handgun is dismissed by a California jury.
1998 – November 30
Permanent provisions of the Brady Act go into effect. Gun dealers are now required to initiate a pre-sale criminal background check of all gun buyers through the newly created National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS) computer system.
1998 – December 1
The NRA files suit in federal court attempting to block the FBI’s collection of information on firearm buyers.
1998 – December 5
President Clinton announces that the instant background check system had prevented 400,000 illegal gun purchases.
Doggone/GA
December 17th, 2012
9:31 am
“I say without guns it would be difficult to kill on a mass scale without bomb making capacity”
No, it wouldn’t. All it takes is a car and a crowd to plow it into. No bomb making ability needed. Just the will, the crowd and the car.
td
December 17th, 2012
9:31 am
We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed;
—Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 17th, 2012
9:33 am
jose
December 17th, 2012
9:29 am
Good thought but little chance real money will be freed up for such and the definition of ‘nuts’ varies…the likelihood such an individual will be “cured” is remote at best…
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
December 17th, 2012
9:33 am
Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44
National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53
Arms Export Control Act (AECA), 22 U.S.C. 2778
Gives the President the authority to control imports and exports of “defense articles,” including firearms and ammunition, in furtherance of world peace and the security and foreign policy of the United States.
weetamoe
December 17th, 2012
9:33 am
Presidential or newspaper editorial or local newspaper blogger platitudes are meaningless. The killer alone is to blame for the deaths of these children and the good people who tried to protect them. The media vultures who interviewed little children on the same day that their classmates were killed are contemptible. There is a *stiff resistance* to gun legislation in Newtown CT according to the NYT. As usual, Obama lets no crisis go to waste — unless it requires him to actually do something courageous (and posturing about guns is not it).
Kevin
December 17th, 2012
9:34 am
The gun lobby should reconsider its position on assault weapons. And the abortion lobby should reconsider its position taking the life of the unborn. Assault weapons along with a low view of life are a dangerous combination.
East Cobb RINO, Inc (LLC)
December 17th, 2012
9:34 am
Freedom Group is an American firearms manufacturer holding company which has acquired notable brands such as Bushmaster, DPMS, and Remington Arms.
Freedom Group is owned by Cerberus Capital Management, a private equity investment firm.
emz
December 17th, 2012
9:34 am
I hope not. I hope there will be more support for mental health issues too.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 17th, 2012
9:35 am
“Criminals obey “gun control” laws in the same manner politicians follow their oaths of office.” Anonymous
President Obama ……… you swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Don’t blow that over this tragic crisis.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 17th, 2012
9:35 am
Doggone/GA
December 17th, 2012
9:31 am
OK so we got bomb makers and vehicular homicide…be tough to get a car into a school, mall or most other buildings where people collect…most killers have specific targets in mind…I guess it does happen but mostly it’s old folks at the helm….
Tall
December 17th, 2012
9:36 am
My son is a sixth grader at Sandy Springs Middle School. One of the full time staff members is an ARMED Fulton County Police Officer. There are also security cameras throughout the school. This is how you prevent these incidents from taking place.
Ivan
December 17th, 2012
9:36 am
Sullum from Reason sums it up why the restrictions only hinder the law abiding citizen….
“The notion that restrictions like these can have a noticeable impact, let alone that they can “end” or “stop” occasional outbursts of senseless violence, is hard to credit unless you believe what Obama insists he does not: that evil can be legislated out of the world by acts of Congress.”
td
December 17th, 2012
9:37 am
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
—Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
Let's get real..
December 17th, 2012
9:37 am
It’s been a while since I’ve read such a bunch of malarkey put forth as “answers”, common sense” and oh well, what to do wringing hands. If we’re honest with ourselves, we know the answer, we know what to do but apparently, we don’t have the spine to take that step. Yes, there are millions of responsible gun owners but do we really want them to have more guns? Is that really an answer? More guns, bullets? Are we really all that afraid that we’re willing to sacrifice lives so we can stay secure behind our wall of weapons and if so, what kind of life is that really?
Dunwoody Granny
December 17th, 2012
9:37 am
People keep saying that it’s no use making certain weapons illegal because the bad guys don’t obey laws anyway. What that argument misses is the fact that when the bad guys steal a weapon, they nearly always steal it from a legal owner. If the weapon were illegal and no law-abiding person owned one, it wouldn’t be available for the bad guy to steal.
Seriously, we need to make semi-automatics and high capacity magazines illegal. No one needs those. Some folks may find them fun (I’ve enjoyed firing a semi-auto on a firing range), but some people also find it fun to drive their cars at 100 mph on the highway, and we as a society have no trouble limiting that.
stands for decibels
December 17th, 2012
9:37 am
Oh, and by the way, when you find me, Stevie Ray (@ 9.26), AND bookman parrot (@ 8.56) in basic agreement on an issue, it might be time to realize that those actually more hawkish than us, might just be a tad extreme.
/drive-by for realz
the cat
December 17th, 2012
9:37 am
I find it very sad a small group of rich white men wrote the 2nd Amendment with no input from others. Certainly not from women or minorities. It is past time for it to be repealed.
A friend of mine has a bushmaster. When asked why all I hear are crickets.
TaxPayer
December 17th, 2012
9:37 am
Assault weapons for condoms. There’s the ticket.
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
December 17th, 2012
9:38 am
1934 — National Firearms Act:
Brought about by the lawlessness and rise of gangster culture during prohibition, President Franklin D. Roosevelt hoped this act would eliminate automatic-fire weapons like machine guns from America’s streets. Other firearms such as short-barreled shotguns and rifles, parts of guns like silencers, as well as other “gadget-type” firearms hidden in canes and such were also targeted. All gun sales and gun manufacturers were slapped with a $200 tax (no small amount for Americans mired in the Great Depression; that would be like a tax of $2,525 today) on each firearm, and all buyers were required to fill out paperwork subject to Treasury Dept. approval.
1968 Gun Control Act:
The assassination of John F. Kennedy, who was killed by a mail-order gun that belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald, inspired this major revision to federal gun laws. The subsequent assasinations of Martin Luther King and presidential candidate Robert Kennedy fueled its quick passage.
License requirements were expanded to include more dealers, and more detailed record keeping was expected of them; handgun sales over state lines were restricted; the list of persons dealers could not sell to grew to include those convicted of felonies (with some exceptions), those found mentally incompetent, drug users and more. The act also defined persons who were banned from possessing firearms.
The key element of this bill outlawed mail order sales of rifles and shotguns; Up until this law, mail order consumers only had to sign a statement that they were over 21 years of age for a handgun (18 for rifle or shotgun); it also detailed more persons who were banned from possessing certain guns, including drug users, and further restricted shotgun and rifles sales.
Read more: Federal Gun Control Legislation – Timeline — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/spot/guntime1.html#ixzz2FJuGSPp6
GA Dawg
December 17th, 2012
9:40 am
The real tragedy here is that if just one person at the school would have been using his 2nd amendment law rights, this would have been prevented.
This stuff happens all the time, why weren’t security guard and the principal carrying arms?
the cat
December 17th, 2012
9:40 am
td-do you know your hero tommy jefferson had many mistresses all of who were forced to have abortions, many dying in the process?
godless heathen - fiscal cliff dweller
December 17th, 2012
9:40 am
Seriously, we need to make semi-automatics and high capacity magazines illegal. No one needs those. Some folks may find them fun (I’ve enjoyed firing a semi-auto on a firing range), but some people also find it fun to drive their cars at 100 mph on the highway, and we as a society have no trouble limiting that.
But you can buy a car capable of going 100+ mph, and hundreds of children are killed every year in auto accidents involving excessive speed. Where is the cry to ban the manufacture and sale of automobiles that go way faster than anyone NEEDS to go or can legally drive?