Sunday, December 16, 2012

Thoughts on Connecticut

Yes, the Connecticut shooting is a tragedy, I won't deny it.  I'm bummed about it.  I have nephews about the age range of the children who were killed.  But a lot of issues bother me about this.


How many people are murdered every day and we don't hear a thing about them? Where is their over the top news coverage? Is it because one person went on a rampage that make his/her victims more tragic? Or because they were children? Or is it because there isn't a name to the shooting suspect that we can pry into their past to determine what kind of sick monster is responsible?  Or isn't murdering one person as sick and tragic to attract this type of news coverage?  And I can't for the life of me see why the media is digging into and reporting on the shooter's life.  In my opinion, he deserves no press.

And speaking of the news, every time something like this or any crisis, such as hurricanes or other natural disasters, etc. happen, the journalism is almost as frightening as the event.  All speculative journalism should be banned.  This "would have, could have, may have, should have, unconfirmed sources", etc. style of "news reporting"  does nothing but deepens fear, cause greater anxieties and is a catalyst for spreading less than factual information.  Until something is fact, it shouldn't be reported.  One has to wonder if it is done more for ratings or "we were first to report" than anything else.

Of course, there is the gun issue.  The incident has people screaming for gun control.  It isn't a secret; I'm a big pro second amendment person, so I will naturally disagree.  In this incident, the guns were basically stolen from his mother, the legal owner.  So, as I always do ask, what is the percentage of all gun crimes committed are by those who legally own guns?  .5%?  1%?  2%?  Do we want to ban cars because a minute few drive drunk and kill someone?  No.  The majority are responsible enough to own guns or cars to use them in a responsible manner.  Let's say we ban all guns and even manage to get them out of the hands of those who illegally possess them (which would be more of an undertaking than legal gun owners).  Then what stops some individual from setting fire to the school?  Or obtaining information to build a make-shift bomb?  Or hi-jacking a school bus full of kids and running it over a cliff?  Or running his/her car at 60 mph into a group of people?  Or poison?   Guns used in this manner are just another means to a horrific end.  Granted, guns may present an easier and quicker means to an end, but doesn't mean that end may not occur without them by some delusional, but driven individual.

And then the argument that we need greater psychological testing to legally obtain them.  Tell me how that would have prevented this?  Mom may have passed, but obviously not the son.  And how much would this cost the taxpayer?  And how would this have stopped Connecticut?

Also, what has any of this have to do with conceal/carry unless you are arming teachers (in this case) which I don't agree with.  That would probably be a bad idea in a lot of schools.  The kid wasn't a legal owner and didn't have a C.C. permit.  Why are the two subjects even in the same breathe?  If he was the owner and had a C.C. permit, I could see the connection and argument.

Unfortunately, there are going to be people out there that are going to cause some sort of mayhem and we probably will never know who they are until they strike.  How many preventative measures to how many different scenarios will it take until everyone feels safe?  The possibilities and costs would be endless.

5 comments:

Vonster said...

The fault is not in our stars but in us.

Randall said...

All the mass shootings that have happened have been from legally own weapons from Columbine right up to this Newtown shooting. I'd say that is 100% AQlso, the single murders you talk about? Those by criminals who have stolen legal guns from homes that don't bother to put them in a gun safe but leave them out. Their home gets busted into, and they steal the guns. I think gun owners who have guns stolen and they weren't in a safe (because safes can be opened) should be held somewhat responsible or more so then they are. With the number dead per shooting, the deaths are more like 25 to 30% of all gun deaths.

Chef Kevin said...

So someone breaks into my house, violating my rights and property and I'm responsible for their future actions? Yikes, that's just scary. Hope no one steals your locked car and runs through a crowd of people killing them after robbing a bank. I'd say you'd be as equally responsible as me, right?

Randall said...

A. Cars are not designed as weapons for killing. B. If someone breaks into your home and you have guns properly locked with trigger locks or in a safe, no problem. But if you have a weapon just laying on the night stand and it is stolen, that is your responsibility. Believe it or not in the Illinois House they are talking about this issue as part of a new CC law.

Chef Kevin said...

And that is what is wrong. I shouldn't be penalized. They should have a new law called aggravated burglary for stealing anything, guns, knives, tasers, etc., that are considered life threatening and make the guilty party spend an extra 10 years, no parole, in prison.

Trigger locks are a joke. There was a video of an IL State Police officer dismantling one in 45 seconds with ordinary house hold tools. I don't have a problem with a safe, I have a problem with people in my house that aren't supposed to be.