Enough of all this talk. We live in the ‘World’s Greatest Country’ and ‘America’s Finest City’ and the best we as citizens can do is, according to our local daily newspaper’s editorial board:
(#1) ** …resist the temptation to see what took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., as an indictment of America.
What took place in Connecticut is an indictment of weak willed politicians, afraid to stand up to a gun lobby. Our country would be even greater and our city would be even finer without them. If the NRA wants to make gun control an issue, fine. Put up pictures the kids that were killed next to Pro Gun Lobby Senators and Congressmen’s mug shots in the UT-SD and ask why they support baby killers.
All 31 United States Senators that have consistently supported the NRA’s legislative agenda were asked to come on Meet the Press yesterday. All declined.
Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) was willing to go on Fox news and propose arming school employees. Talking about the dead principal at Sandy Hook, Gohmert said:
“Having been a judge and reviewed photographs of these horrific scenes and knowing that children have these defensive wounds, gun shots through their arms and hands as they try to protect themselves, and, hearing the heroic stories of the principal, lunging, trying to protect, Chris, I wish to God she had had an M-4 in her office, locked up so when she heard gunfire, she pulls it out and she didn’t have to lunge heroically with nothing in her hands and takes him out and takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids.”
Here’s the video:
This brings us to point #2 made in this weekends’ UT-SD editorial pages:
**perhaps we need to have a debate about identifying and helping the mentally ill, or about making schools safer, or about reassuring worried schoolchildren that they are safe.
Let’s start by identifying the gutless wonders that go on TV and advocate more guns in the wake of a tragic shooting as bad for our nation’s mental health.
Let’s take the mental health system out of the hands of the health insurance companies that deny coverage.
Let’s take the mental health system out of the clutches of the big drug companies, who make obscene profits off medications that are historically equivalent to using leeches to cure influenza. (Not all drugs are bad, but the system we have for evaluating their effectiveness is centered on return on investment more than it is good outcomes.)
Let’s take the mental health system out of the court system, wherein it takes the commission of a felony to get professional help through the state. We’re using our prisons as mental hospitals and felonious behavior is the ticket for admission. (See this article.)
And that brings us to point #3 in the conclusions reached by our local daily newspaper:
** This is not the time to take advantage of tragedy. This is not the time for shouting.
This is the time for this nation to come together. We have done it many times before in the wake of horrible news. What we need to do is to cherish our children and our families, to reach out to our loved ones, our neighbors and our community. This is the time for the goodness of the American spirit to shine through, to get us all through these sorrowful days and to a brighter tomorrow.
Excuse my French…
I say horseshit. I’m mad as hell and I’M GONNA SHOUT ABOUT IT. You should, too.
If there ever was a time to change things, it’s now. The NRA is in hiding. Their Facebook page is down. Their Twitter account is dead. Their lobbyists are hiding under a rock.
Most Americans don’t want to ban guns. Neither do I. But imposing some reasonable restrictions on the use of objects than can endanger others is sounding like a pretty good idea right now. After all, we do it for automobiles and drivers. You even have to show ID to buy cold medicines.
As John Oliver said last week, “One failed shoe bomb, and we take off our shoes; 31 school shootings since Columbine, and no change in our regulation of guns.”
The old saw about “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” doesn’t cut it anymore in the face of overwhelming evidence that our heavily armed nation is less safe than countries that place limits on firearms. From Slate:
On April 28, 1996, a gunman opened fire on tourists in a seaside resort in Port Arthur, Tasmania. By the time he was finished, he had killed 35 people and wounded 23 more. It was the worst mass murder in Australia’s history.
Twelve days later, Australia’s government did something remarkable. Led by newly elected conservative Prime Minister John Howard, it announced a bipartisan deal with state and local governments to enact sweeping gun-control measures. A decade and a half hence, the results of these policy changes are clear: They worked really, really well.
At the heart of the push was a massive buyback of more than 600,000 semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, or about one-fifth of all firearms in circulation in Australia. The country’s new gun laws prohibited private sales, required that all weapons be individually registered to their owners, and required that gun buyers present a “genuine reason” for needing each weapon at the time of the purchase. (Self-defense did not count.) In the wake of the tragedy, polls showed public support for these measures at upwards of 90 percent.
What happened next has been the subject of several academic studies. Violent crime and gun-related deaths did not come to an end in Australia, of course. But as the Washington Post’s Wonkblog pointed out in August, homicides by firearm plunged 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides. The drop in suicides by gun was even steeper: 65 percent. Studies found a close correlation between the sharp declines and the gun buybacks. Robberies involving a firearm also dropped significantly. Meanwhile, home invasions did not increase, contrary to fears that firearm ownership is needed to deter such crimes. But here’s the most stunning statistic. In the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, there had been 11 mass shootings in the country. There hasn’t been a single one in Australia since.
Three Actual Things You Can Do
While the editors at the UT-SD sing campfire songs and hope that we’ll forget about the latest gun tragedy (which is what they’re hoping we’ll do, by the way), here are actual things you can do:
#1. The President seems like he gets it this time. After dodging the issues surrounding regulating firearms during his first term, his speeches this weekend indicate that he’s willing to expend valuable political capital on this. He’s had to be very miserly with that influence over the past four years in the face of opposition determined to block his every move.
Let’s let Mr. Obama know we’ve got his back on this one. Join with the over 140,000 Americans (as of 6am today) who’ve signed the White House petition to immediately address this issue. Sign it here. Here’s how it reads:
WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:
Immediately address the issue of gun control through the introduction of legislation in Congress.
The goal of this petition is to force the Obama Administration to produce legislation that limits access to guns. While a national dialogue is critical, laws are the only means in which we can reduce the number of people murdered in gun related deaths.
Powerful lobbying groups allow the ownership of guns to reach beyond the Constitution’s intended purpose of the right to bear arms. Therefore, Congress must act on what is stated law, and face the reality that access to firearms reaches beyond what the Second Amendment intends to achieve.
The signatures on this petition represent a collective demand for a bipartisan discussion resulting in a set of laws that regulates how a citizen obtains a gun.
Get Guns Off the Streets of San Diego
#2. Support the effort of our city’s Black Clergy to help get the guns off the streets of San Diego. The United African American Ministerial Action Council (UAAMAC) is sponsoring the 5th Annual “Gift Card for Gun Exchange” this Friday, December 21st.
The program offers “Gift Cards for Guns, NO Questions Asked!” They’re partnering with elected officials and law enforcement offices to offer gift cards in exchange for guns. Participants will receive $50 for rifles and shotguns, $100 for hand guns and assault weapons, only one gift card per vehicle no matter how many guns.
This program is supported by: District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, San Diego City Councilman Tony Young, San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne, San Diego Sheriff William Gore and the United African American Ministerial Action Council
The gun exchange program will start at 8:30 a.m. at 415 Euclid Avenue, San Diego, CA 92114. Contact: UAAMAC staff (619) 264-1213 or(619) 964-1064. Donations to purchase weapons will be accepted up to the event. UAAMAC is a 501(c)(3) Non Profit Organization.
Tell Congress We’re Watching. And We Won’t Forget.
#3. One immediate step in the upcoming battle (and trust me, it will be a battle) will be the introduction of legislation to re-impose the banning of assault weapons, which expired during the Bush administration. Sen. Dianne Feinstein told the Meet the Press this weekend:
“I’m going to introduce in the Senate and the same bill will be introduced in the House, a bill to ban assault weapons. It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession. Not retroactively but prospectively. And it will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets. So there will be a bill. We’ve been working on it now for a year”.
I know that this bill will be largely symbolic. It isn’t going to take anybody’s guns away, despite what the NRA will say. But it’s time the Gun Lobby learns that there’s a limit on what reasonable people will put up with when it comes to their fear mongering and profiteering. So I say support this law. And tell your Congresscritter that this had better be just the first step.
I know pressuring critters like Darrell Issa is like spitting into the wind. But do it anyway. Let’s publicize their lame excuses. Send ‘em to me and I’ll print them, right next to pictures from Connecticut. Tell us, Darrell (or Duncan), when did you decide killing children was a good idea?
I’ll be back tomorrow with news about other stuff….
On This Day: 1791 – A traffic regulation in New York City established the first street to go “One Way.” 1955 – Carl Perkins wrote “Blue Suede Shoes.” Less than 48 hours later, he recorded it in Memphis, TN. 1969 – The U.S. Air Force closed its Project “Blue Book” by concluding that there was no evidence of extraterrestrial spaceships behind thousands of UFO sightings.
On This Day: Eat Fresh! Today’s Farmers’ Markets: Escondido (Welk Resort 8860 Lawrence Welk Drive) 1pm –Sunset
Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to “The Starting Line” and get an email every time a new article in this series is posted!
I read the Daily Fishwrap(s) so you don’t have to… Catch “the Starting Line” Monday thru Friday right here at San Diego Free Press (dot) org. Send your hate mail and ideas to DougPorter@SanDiegoFreePress.
Doug Porter
Latest posts by Doug Porter (see all)
- Last Call. Last Column. - December 14, 2018
- Which Presidential Candidate Will You Support in 2020? - December 13, 2018
- Mounting the Assault on Big Gay and Other Drivel From SDSU’s Minimum Wage Scrooge - December 12, 2018
Great article! (and your link to the other article is broken, BTW) But the proposed “solutions” don’t go nearly far enough. We can’t hope that by just putting a band-aid on this cancer we can expect the symptoms to resolve. Just as none are free until all are free–none are safe unless all are safe. I certainly agree with your assessment of the bulk of the problem:
“Let’s take the mental health system out of the hands of the health insurance companies that deny coverage.
Let’s take the mental health system out of the clutches of the big drug companies, who make obscene profits off medications that are historically equivalent to using leeches to cure influenza. (Not all drugs are bad, but the system we have for evaluating their effectiveness is centered on return on investment more than it is good outcomes.)
Let’s take the mental health system out of the court system, wherein it takes the commission of a felony to get professional help through the state. We’re using our prisons as mental hospitals and felonious behavior is the ticket for admission.”
But there is a better means to “fix” this dysfunctional value system and that is to use our big brains and apply the scientific method to social concern. We need to finally see humanity as a whole and integral part of the planet that supports us and cooperate on providing for all our basic needs–safety in our homes and public spaces being a large one. The Zeitgeist Movement advocates just such an approach where the guns don’t need to be “controlled”, but rather the people create a society that embraces reason, science and the technology we already possess to create abundance and provide for everyone’s needs such that guns are no longer necessary. If everything you needed were free there would be no need to steal anything. If everyone’s needs were being met by a society that cared for every member there would be no need to end one’s life in a horrific show of our level of dysfunction.
The Zeitgeist Movement’s “Moving Forward” video is now available streaming on Netflix or for free download from http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com as well as GB’s of other information. Check it out and see if the ideas proposed are not an elegant solution to things like this horrible and unnecessary tragedy.
Peace and keep up the good work!
thanks for the comment. I fixed the link, too.
I can see it – the NRA attacking Obama for acting more like a parent than a president; I’m glad Obama is connected like the rest of us parents. But the likes of Larry Pratt in USA Today’s opinion piece who holds as the ideal the daily war conditions of Israel – the NRA would have us all become gun slingers turning our communities and schools into shooting grounds. Remember the “Open Carry” movement? These 19th century bruts need to be reminded that the shoot out at the OK Corral was over gun control – the good guys fought for keeping guns off the streets. In the 1800’s gun control was considered progress. The NRA of today are the harbingers of hate and fear; we must turn them away. Their lack of shame speaks volumes.
You got it right, Doug. You know that the only action possible is local, where we’ve just shown that the change has come. The NRA is going to continue its obscene invocations to use the gun against the gun — which is nothing more than a manifesto for a civil war over, what? Guns? — but this time? I think we can tell that this time more people have realized that common sense is still not just possible but is growing into political power. We can start with our outrage and put it to freakin’ use. Let’s do it.
Great editorial, Doug. I would go even farther. You say, “Most Americans don’t want to ban guns. Neither do I.” I say,”Elimiinate the second amendment and replace it by a right to health care.” Most sane societies don’t have a right to gun ownership, but they do have a right to health care. As a consequence they have far fewer gun related deaths by orders of magnitude, something like 150 in Canada last year. About the same number in Germany. Here it’ll be around 40,000 this year.
Constitutions have been updated periodically in advanced nations all over the world. We have one that is older than all the ones in Europe despite the fact that we are a newer country.
People will argue and debate about how much gun control and where to draw the line etc. I say have a clear position: Eliminate the right to own guns.
I hail what they did in Australia and it should be done here also.
It kind it goes back to what Andy said. Most Americans do not want a total ban on guns and I agree with what he said. And by most Americans I think that includes many who lean left, at least to some degree. I don’t think what happened in Australia will fly here.
Here’s a questions I have. You said you would like to see a complete ban on all guns (I assume you mean private citizens). Does that include hunting?
Yes, it includes hunting because I don’t believe that humans should take pleasure in killing animals. If it were necessary for survival, that would be one thing, but it’s not. Animals, for instance elephants, are being exterminated and brought to extinction by guys with Bushmasters because they can make money from selling their tusks. I think we need to have more appreciation and respect for animals than we do. If deer or bear populations start to get out of hand, then I think hunting should be authorized to cull them but only then. It shouldn’t be a right.
I don’t hunt (and don’t own any guns) but I like to fish and that’s still liking an animal. Should that right be taken away?
I will have to disagree with you about hunting. I DO draw the line as to whether or not the animal is going to be eaten and I agree with you 100% about what’s happening to elephants and other animals being slaughtered for trophies.
The above petition to the President correctly blames the lobbying groups for the lack of gun control regulations, but then invites the Congress to act. However, it is very difficult to make Congress to act because those same lobbying groups help raise money and contribute directly to congresspersons’ re-election campaigns. Without changing the rules of the game in Washington DC any legislative proposal to enact gun control is likely to be voted down.
Therefore, we all must support the American Anti-Corruption Act which will change the rules of the game in Washington DC. If implemented, it will empower ordinary Americans to participate in campaign funding by creating an annual $100 tax rebate that can be used for contributions to federal candidates. It will close the revolving door, limit super PAC and lobbyist contributions, mandate full transparency and prohibit members of congress from soliciting money from special interest groups. Visit http://anticorruptionact.org/ to become a citizen co-sponsor.
Then, the gun control laws, the right to health care, funding for the renewable energy and a sensible foreign policy will follow.
The Second Amendment states: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to keep the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The Framers said nothing, knew nothing of automatic and semi-automatic assault weapons. Somehow I don’t think that was what they had in mind. Further, the militia they were talking about were the average citizens who out of necessity banded together to fight the British and other invaders. There was no regular Army at the time–farmers with guns and bayonets were the Army.
Over the years, we have allowed the NRA to completely pervert and subvert the intentions of the Second Amendment. In the words of President Obama, “That has to change.”
For over a Hundred years the prevailing interpretation of the 2nd Amendment allowed gun control. Towns of the old west implemented controls as a sign of progress. The militia system was elminated in 1877 with the creation of the National Guard. All that is needed is returning to the earlier interpretation and explore the one limitation that has stood the test – the ban on full-auto machine guns. The gun vs gun scenario’s laid out by the NRA and the pro-gun lobby seeks to turn our streets into shooting galleries. Nearly half of the Police Officers shot in the line of duty are shot with their own weapon. And their are trained. Guns embolden cowards to pursue violence.
The idea was to be equaly armed. Back then Farmers and the military had the same weapons.
I don’t live “back then” do you?
It may still be possible to do more than simply “exchange guns” by pushing the City to outlaw guns in the City of San Diego. It is an idea who’s time has come.
That will never fly, and will be likely swatted away by even the lowest of courts as unconstitutional. The 2nd Amendment is what it is, even if it is open to interpretation. Banning guns outright would clearly be in violation. Banning certain kinds of firearms, OTOH……
As you note – it flies in both directions. The lawyer’s rule – define reality, leave interpretation to the lower courts. Since the 50’s the NRA has throw the doors wide open. Have faith, and a clear vision. The Constitution is always subject to interpretation – remember Plussey v Fergusson. Intepretations are amended to reflect changing community standards. The pro-gun lobby has been screaming at the top of their lungs drowning out the rest of us. Let us start screaming back. It has worked, it does work. Civil rights Act, Voting Rights Act, Roe v Wade etc, etc.
Australia and Britain didn’t have a problem dispensing with the intricacies of the law after mass shootings there and changing the law so that anyone wanting to own a firearm had to prove that he or she really needed it.
Just because it worked down under doesn’t mean it will work here.
Nor that it won’t. Are you saying America doesn’t work so well – you may be on to something.
Australia’s home invasions sky rocketed after the ban and have been out of control since. But un-occupied break in’s droped. I guess it will be nice the my crap isn’t stolen while I’m away
In Australia the term “home invasion” is a broad grouping of actions, according to authorities and can include what we call burglary. The good news, the sky rocketing statistics in Australia is but a fraction of what happens in California. I just read a number of news accounts – the elderly are common targets, as is cash and drugs. Reports indicate many of the perpetrators use weapons such as bats – not guns. With degrees and experience in Criminology I’ve seen many cases of persons who thought they were tough enough to kill to save their car, or TV (your crap). Question becomes one of values – a willingness to kill over property. And I’m sure you don’t get it – we’re Americans, we harbor no warm and fuzzy idea’s about anything, let alone guns. You forget WE ARE the most heavily armed population on the planet. No one, not Australia, comes even close. And yes, we all know the old song – criminals don’t follow the laws anyway. And you want to talk gangs, hey we got you there as well. And I can promise you gang-bangers don’t care is you’re carrying – it’s never stopped them in the past. Fact is America, the land of the brave is huddled in fear. Fear and freedom hardly go hand in hand. It’s time for push back, just to regain some balance.
Listen I now live in a very stand your ground state. I called San Diego home at one time. And was born and raised in California. Yes, if someone is threatening my family, me or my property I will not sit around and evaluate if they are there just to take my stuff. When we lived in San Diego my wife was attacked in our La Mesa apartment. No one came to her aid when she screamed; the police could barley care less. If she had a gun she may or may not have been able to use it. At least she may have had the opportunity to. And 10 years later the scars are still there. I have been trained, educated and personally find most people interest are to be right over constructive. If you want a current case where someone was there with a firearm to help there are plenty but most notably the Portland Mall shooting. But no one speaks of that. Mostly I hear people speaking about, is how all conservatives are psychos. I personally think it is sad that people find away in the most horrible tragedies to get on their I told you so wagon and push their political agendas. Part of the problem I see is that our media has this no hope for the future. Political parties have become the new division and have consumed our values. Hollywood bears no responsibility or morality. And more over anything our country has forgotten how to teach our children personal accountability. When something goes wrong we find excuses and labels, always something else to blame. This is not political it is a question of morality. See it how you want to just keep your major metropolitan laws out of my rural area. Your lack of warm fuzzy is not American, its Californian. You find warm and fuzzy in heart and in your home. Educations in Criminology are nothing without a job their research is just as bias as the NRA. But whatever happens will happen we will all eventually loose. I will unwilling lose my rights. You will trade them for the opportunity to say “I told you so”. I hope for your sake they outlaw bats. There go the Padres.
Polemic – ok. I worked the field, I had to make decisions. It was a job. Ok, the media – some say it reflects the times. Estranged and alienated. A condition known as anomie. Hollywood, as the rest of America’s dominate industries exist to make money. (and produces only about 20% of the media today). After the 2nd Rodney King riots in LA – when the high schools blew up in 92 – I watched a community meeting on C-span. An over flow crowd, school authorities seated on a stage, microphones circulating among the crowd, high emotions, an auditorium filled with worry. One woman in the audiance was in the middle – she was the head of the LAUSD Diversity Program for the last twenty years. She was trying hard to mediate between those on stage and the audiance. In mid-sentence she froze; a light went on – then she said “for 20 years we’ve been telling these kids how they’re different, we never once bothered to show them that they shared anything in common.” Feelings of isolation and being alone contribute to our sense of fear. Your wife attacked in an apartment – shared walls, close neighbors yet no one got involved. And if she had a gun? Who knows the outcome. Newtown happily shows a healthy sense of community and it happened there. In Portland, I heard reports that 60 shots were fired – two people killed. What was the shooter’s will or ability? And I believe it was a very quick police reponse. Consider Japan – they average about a dozen gun deaths a year. What the US averages in a few hours. Right over constructive – your position appears to be do nothing – status quo is fine. If anything arm everybody. Is that about right? My position comes from seeing what happens when you hand a gun to a weak or scared individual; police are trained, practice at Duffytown, yet when shots are fired look how many miss. Why? They too are scared. The decision to go to the Glock was not taken lightly. Why – because of concern over introducing 17 bullets rather than just 6 in the old police special 38. Look at Miami in 1982 a clear example of the gun to gun solution in action. Seized by fear of the criminals released from Cuba in the Muriel boat lift in 81, following a near tripling of gun sales the murder shot up 160%. The Police Chief went on TV to plead for the people to turn in the guns. Why? The nervous, the untrained the short tempered turned neighbor arguments over rose bushes into a homicide; a parking lot fender bender into a shoot out between mothers. My goal is less fear. To get there we need to push back the oblivion clock – move back from the abyss. Taking serious the regulations already in place is a start. In the end who is brave who is the coward? Who trusts? Who does not? I prefer the brave over the coward.
Come man. I don’t think you really believe half the stuff you said here.
“Your lack of warm fuzzy is not American, its Californian.”
Get real. There are places a lot more anti gun than California and you know that.
“Mostly I hear people speaking about, is how all conservatives are psychos.”
There’s always extremists on both sides. There are not shortage of conservatives who have some not so kind words for liberals, or that liberalism is a disease. That’s always my favorite. Not saying that you are like that, but you know many are. These things go both ways.
Your forgetting that the worst weapon of all if fear. And you will just be empowering the ones who will use it against it. Look at Australia guns gone breaks in’s drop home invasions sky rocket. Your warm and fuzzy idea’s of gun laws are completly unrealestic and irresponsible. Do you for on moment thing some gang banger is goining to care about your law. Nope, their going to come across that border with the expectations of exploiting it. Fear is bes kept mutual, the bad should fear good people. If you don’t want a gun don’t own one. Ask dane Fienstiien how that CCW is working for her. It gives her comfort or should I say mein Kampfy feeling.
Jon- are you willing to say that Newtown CT is the price we pay for the Second Amendment? Yes or No.
No not at all. I think the answers to that of nothing to do with the second amendment. Rather closer to home. And shame on you for trying to pin a non caring attitude on me. I think attacking the second amendment is passing the buck and not taking care of the moral values that are in the home. We are so quick to give people a reason why they don’t have to have personal accountabillity. No wonder people do the crazy stuff they do. I think atacking the second amendment is just another cop-out. We need to look deeper than that
Jon- you have evaded the big question. Says everything.
Soooo……somehow the shootings in Newtown were the fault of the parents who sent their kids to school there? They weren’t “moral” enough for you? And who are you to tell the rest of the world what their “moral values” should be? Who are you to judge what kind of parent Nancy Lanza was? Her son was emotionally disturbed by all accounts. Is that because his mother didn’t have the right “moral values?”
Had the assault weapon ban not been allowed to expire in 2004, then maybe Adam Lanza would not have gotten his hands on that Bushmaster rifle and some of those kids would still be alive today.
You danced around it quite nicely, but it’s pretty clear that your answer to Anna’s question is a resounding ‘Yes,’ and that these massacres are simply the price we pay for our “freedoms.”
So I go to work today and several people who regularly come in and out of my office talked purchasing guns over the weekend. Not too sure it was very bright of them to boast that but then again the very fact that Fridays events prompted them to run out and do that speaks volumes.
There’s no denying people have a great capacity to act stupid. Look at those co-workers or visitors to your office who talk of buying a gun. Are they ready to kill? Shoot the first scary shadow that crosses their window? Like their neighbor, son, daughter, father, cousin, uncle and friend, all killed by the ease of pulling a trigger. Yes, it’s a virtual world out there filled with people who think themselves an island of good but may one day wake up, as in the film “Falling Down” and realize, “I’m the bad guy!”
A return to the Wild West days of shootouts in the streets is upon us…..
To answer your question yes. In another article in the Rag about a month ago I mentioned a women I work with who lives in OB and purchased a hand gun and she carries it in her possession and keeps it loaded. We’ve asked her what happens if she pulls it out on the wring person. Her answer? Collateral damage. Pure madness.
I think ultimately what we need is to educate people about 1. Having a gun on your possession will not help you in a surprise attack and 2. Misjudgment can mean criminal charges and a long time in prison, not to mention an innocent life. Hopefully less people will be interested in possessing a concealed weapon
We can educate, write, scream, it will make no difference for as long as a gun lobby is as strong as it is. See my earlier post for a way to fix the problem, i.e., change rules of the game in Washington DC. Then, sensible policies will start taking place.
Moreover, what you proposes may only work on rational individuals, not on psychopaths.
True, but my hope is that there’s enough rational people out there where a change in thinking patterns will make a real difference.
I do sympathize with your sentiment. I just wanted to emphasize that the game is rigged against ordinary people when in comes to representation. Congress represents money not ordinary people. Solve the corruption in Congress and then you can use reason to address other issues. Until then, little change is possible. But there is hope http://anticorruptionact.org/
I don’t think the U-T was ever this shameless under the Copley “leadership”. . . . Manchester has sunken the paper into the muck; it looks like crap, he made the paper lie about a poll during the recent elections, all the good people are walking away. Then this mass murder happened, and BAM! – the suckiness was jacked to 11.
For the good of the city, Doug Manchester must surrender the paper, sell everything he owns at a loss, and submit to life imprisonment in one of the secret logging camps the North Koreans run in Siberia (which is where IKEA gets its birch wood, BTW.) There he will work until the labor kills him, and he will be buried somewhere in the vast forests, where the bears will pee on the mound.
If we abolish the second amendment, it doesn’t mean that people will not have guns. It means that they will not have a “right” to own a gun. If you think about it, why should we have a “right” to own a gun. In order to own a gun, people should have to first prove that they need one and, secondly, go through a difficult and costly training course similar to what one has to do to get a pilot’s license. That ought to be deterrent enough.
I say abolish the right to gun ownership; institute a right to health care.
I knew sooner or later someone would blame the mother. All the idiots who think that mental illness is the result of bad parenting are the reason we have a completely inadequate mental health care system . That and the profit motive, not limited to drug companies. There is no coordinated, consistent system of care in San Diego or the nation for stopping irrational, horrendous violence before it happens. And in case you hanen’t noticed, parents are usually the first victims.