Fuck The Second Amendment, Twenty Children Are DEAD

Writer’s note: I wrote this piece immediately following the news of the tragedy in Connecticut today. I want to make one thing very clear before you even begin reading. I wrote this piece first and foremost as a father. A father of a child who would have been in one of those kindergarten classrooms this morning, if we lived in Newtown, CT. Yes, I am writing this as political commentary on my political commentary blog, but all of these things I say first as a parent, second as a concerned human being, and lastly as a commentator on the world around us.

 School shooting: Students are escorted out of the school in Newtown, Conn. IMAGE
Photo courtesy MSN News; Gun-Obsessed Society Courtesy of the NRA

This has to fucking stop now.

Another mass shooting. This time, at an elementary school in Connecticut. Just days after a mall was shot up in Oregon. Obviously as I write this, reports are still coming in, but confirmed body counts right now put the death toll at least twenty. And yes, your worst fears about this kind of story came true…children are among those reported dead. In fact, the story I linked to says that “many” of those shot were children. Many. Many children shot. Just one child lost is a tragedy unto itself. but twenty is a nightmare and a black-eye on this country.

Yes, in case you’re wondering, I am absolutely going to talk about gun control. Right fucking now. The time is now. The time is not when it’s been awhile since we’ve had a shooting and everyone’s feeling generally safe. The time is now, when we all feel a little terrorized and victimized. The time is now, when the feeling of outrage and utter sorrow is so strong you feel you could vomit or cry or both. That’s when we should talk about curbing the prevalence of gun violence in this country. It needs to sting. It needs to feel like we’ve had the rug ripped out from under us. Maybe then we can understand precisely the feeling we’re trying to avoid at all costs.

Kindergartners were shot. I happen to have a kindergartner living under my roof. He’s six years old. He loves “Star Wars,” Lego, and comic book heroes. I can’t even imagine the terror that a six-year-old feels when an armed gunman is mowing down their classmates. These are kids that probably all still believe in Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy. And now, reality, in its stark and naked pointlessness will have pierced the veil that shrouds all children. Tragedy is an understatement today.

I can hear the voices of dissent now. I can hear them telling me that this shooting doesn’t illustrate a need for gun control, it illustrates a need for better mental health facilities. Fuck that. Yes, it’s true that most normal gun owners don’t do things like this. And I would endorse fully a plan that would build infrastructure around the idea of finding potentially dangerous people before they do these things and keeping guns out of their hands. But let’s not fuck around here. There are multiple children dead, shot in their places of learning. Don’t talk to me about how guns don’t kill people. They do kill people, rather effectively. And unfortunately they do so without regard for the age of their victims.

Imagine the horror parents of the victims are facing right this very second. Their child may be shot, or worse, dead, and in the end there was nothing they could do…nothing. They couldn’t even do the very first thing that any parent does and just comfort their children in their time of need. Yes, the level of depravity that the gunman had sunk to is not to be taken lightly. But as we find out more details, does it really matter what kind of gun he used? Does it really matter whether technically a gun is classified an “assault rifle” or not?

The question has to become this, “If we are unable to even send our children off to school to learn without fear of being mowed down in their tracks, what is the point of having a constitutional right to bear arms?” Intelligent societies evolve. There’s no mention, for instance, of cars or speed limits in the Constitution. And yet, the Feds set up maximum speed zones on our highways for our own safety. I can’t wait for the angry feedback I’ll get comparing speed limit laws to gun laws, but to me as soon as you have a case of over a dozen children being shot dead like so many ducks at a carnival game, fuck semantics. Fuck constitutional pleasantries.

Sensible people don’t mind sensible limitations of their freedoms. Especially when their freedoms have the power to kill twenty kids.

If this story, if twenty or more kids losing their lives in a bloody shooting spree just over a week before Christmas doesn’t get people off their asses and rattle their senses loose, nothing will. The NRA will immediately mobilize to get their message of gun sycophancy out there. They’ll claim that the crazy liberals are out to take away your guns. And you know what? Maybe we fucking should. Maybe we should take away your guns that give you the ability to do this kind of thing. You can keep a gun in your house to protect yourself from the Bogey Man if you want. You can keep a gun in your house to go hunting if you will. But what you should not be able to do is own a firearm that turns you into a walking, talking, bullet dispensary.

Liberals need to be angry. Outrage doesn’t even come close to the kind of public fury that needs to be drummed up over this. Of course we can’t take away every gun everywhere. But we need to stop giving lip service to tired arguments about criminals just being criminals and not paying the price for someone else’s mistake. In civil societies, when a problem is discovered, solutions are found. We have a problem with guns in this country. To deny that is to deny the blue hue in the sky, or the wetness of water. We have a problem with the availability of them, and no amount of mental health testing will do any good when you can still purchase the kinds of weapons that fire hundreds of rounds a minute.

Gun nuts already hate me anyway, so I’m not really concerned about them. I’m concerned about convincing the causal gun owner that he or she can be in favor of tighter regulations on the acquisition of high-powered, multi-shot firearms and still be in favor of our constitutional right to own them. Despite the admittedly incendiary and baiting title of this piece, I’m not advocating for the outright stripping of all firearms from private citizens. But the time is right fucking now to start acting like adults, and more importantly to start discussing things like adults. Twenty children in Connecticut weren’t old enough to participate in the discussion, but goddamnit we all are old enough. We owe it to those who died today, and to all those who were lucky enough to avoid tragedy to agree to psychological testing, agree to waiting periods of a month or more, and to agree to finally treat guns like the killing tools they are, instead of a miracle device that does only altruistic deeds.

What I’m advocating is a tempering of our Second Amendment rights with everyone’s first and most basic right…to not be killed by someone else. Anyone who believes that Thomas Jefferson wouldn’t be in favor of regulating access to truly high-powered weaponry is a fool. This incident in Connecticut would be a wake-up call to anyone, and sadly we can already count on it falling on thousands and thousands of deaf ears.

It’s time to start screaming. Loudly. 




About James Schlarmann 2612 Articles
James is the founding contributor and editor-in-chief of The Political Garbage Chute, a political satire and commentary site, which can be found on Facebook as well. You definitely should not give that much a shit about his opinions.
  • Constance Reader

    Hear, Hear. Well written. Fuck this noise. People are DYING.

  • Tara Marshall

    The right to gun ownership in the Second Amendment is tied to being in a well-ordered militia. Militias that are organized have things like gun safety classes and other protections. The members, ideally, know each other fairly well, and one would hope they would report if one of their members seemed to be destabilizing.

    So yes, let’s allow people to have guns – if they enroll in the local militia and show up to meetings at least once monthly. These meetings should be required to go over the basics of safety – locking rules, wearing orange in the woods, where to point and not point a weapon, keeping it unloaded, and so on.

    If you can’t take the time and money to do that, you can’t afford to own a firearm.

    • LaVelle

      I full agree!!!

    • Milehisnk

      Actually, the right to gun ownership was NOT tied to being in a “well-ordered” militia. The SCOTUS has ruled already that self defense and firearm ownership is a fundamental human right. The second Amendment does not grant any rights, it only recognizes human rights and expresses the fact that the government does NOT have the power to limit our ability to keep our freedom.

      • Lee

        It seems to me you’re confusing two meanings of the word “right” (and that probably the Supreme Court is, as well).

        In one sense, a right can be viewed as an inalienable moral consideration which we believe all humans possess regardless of the context of government in which they live.
        In another sense it can be considered an enforceable claim within a country’s legal system which commands government and other persons to guarantee certain kinds of treatment to every citizen.

        The Universal Declaration of Human Rights tries to recognize which rights belong to the former category, and to require signatory countries to enshrine those natural rights in civil law, thus bringing them into the latter.

        In no other country that I’m aware of – and certainly no “civilized” country – is gun ownership considered a “fundamental human right.” Other civilized countries view it as, at best, a privilege and a responsibility.

        Therefore, when we talk about the right to gun ownership, we are talking about a social pact, granted – yes, granted – by the Second Amendment. It follows, then, that the right IS tied to “a well ordered militia,” and that we have the ability to define what constitutes the kind of “arms” we have a right to keep and bear. It has already been established that “arms” does not mean “unfettered access to every conceivable kind of weapon that we may potentially possess or devise”; bombs and rocket launchers and chemical weapons are “arms,” but even the most rabid defenders of free access to firearms can’t take the tack that possession of those could be considered a right – or even a privilege we would want to have.

        Look: I’m a supporter of your right to own firearms. I will stand up and fight for that right alongside you. But the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are much more basic than the right to keep and bear the kinds of weapons that are being used to terrorize our public spaces and murder innocents. We have to take a reasonable position, or we’ll all be living in terror forever. That’s not the America I think you want, and I know it’s not the one I want. Can we work on this?

    • Anon

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

      The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms. The militia is what the authors of the constitution felt was necessary for security of a free state, not a prerequisite to keeping arms.

      District of Columbia v. Heller – The Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves.

      So control your own guns, and stop patting each other on the back for spreading misinformation, just because you guys like the way it sounds. Confirmation bias coupled with cognitive dissonance… very dangerous.

      Just remember, controlling guns is like controlling marriage. If you think gay marriage is ok (as I do), then you should respect gun ownership as well.

      Cars and swimming pools kill more kids than guns, every year. If you want to save the maximum number of children, you need to re-prioritize.

      • What a bunch of excellent pro-gun bullshit! When two gay people get married, what are the chances of 27 people dying?

  • Jeff Vandenberg

    Thank you. I agree 100%. We must talk about this NOW!

  • Brina

    I’m unsure how you can go off on gun control before the facts surrounding this case are public knowledge.

    Were the guns legal?

    • Seriously? That’s your question? Were the guns legally purchased? Who gives a shit? Our country has a populace that clings to their guns and is willing to sacrifice the lives of eighteen children before they’re willing to practice sound judgment about those guns. That’s how I can “go off” about gun control when I don’t have “all the facts” of the case. I have enough facts. Eighteen kids dead, all of them shot by a gun. That was more than enough to comment on.

      Well that and the other mass shootings this year alone.

      • Kevin Bears

        Exactly… How bout this? Let’s let them have guns. The same kind of guns that they had when the second amendment was put into the Bill of Rights…

        • Hugh

          And lets have the same method of fee speech as well, I’ll wait while you drag your soap box out to the public square (these rotting tomatoes won’t throw themselves) or maby the hand cranked printing press.

          The continetal volunteers often had better firearms than the british army, rifles which were far more accurate than muskets…

          • Wow, I bet you think you’re clever, but while you trying so hard to be condescending, you have missed the point. The gun laws in the USA are out dated and need to be tightened. You gun loving yankees are putting lives of people at risk and your global reputation is sinking to an new low. If I were you I’d be really ashamed to be an American right now.

      • mel

        The sad thing is that you can control guns but all that is going to do is leave honest people helpless. The bad people and crazy people will still get them.

        • No. It will also help diminish the number of guns in general. I know that scares the tin foil hatters and the HOLY FUCK THE GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO TAKE OVER OUR LIVES people. But I myself am not worried about their being FEWER guns on the street. That’d be like being concerned about getting more blow jobs than you’ve asked for.

        • Yeah, why bother having speed limits when the bad guys are still going to speed?

        • No, what is truly sad, is that you actually think that increased gun control will “leave honest people helpless”. Guess what, we have bad and crazy people in Canada too, but we have sensible gun control laws and no one I know (outside of a few highly regulated hunters) have guns. And guess what we are and all feel very safe without any guns to “protect”. On the contrary, it is the lack of gun ownership that makes us feel so safe! Just take a look at our gun related deaths compared to yours and you’ll see. Sadly the most recent gun related death of Canadians I heard of in the news, was when 2 Canadian tourist were shot in Florida of the gun-loving USA!

      • Mel

        I have enough facts too.

        This year, a bunch of kids drown in back yard swimming pools. I don’t need logic, or reason. I just know that kids died in swimming pools. If swimming pools were outlawed, then we would have zero children drowning in swimming pool deaths.

        • Lee

          If you were standing in front of one of the parents of the children who were murdered today, I bet you wouldn’t have the gall to say that. And if you would … words can’t describe what kind of a stain must be on your heart.

          Here’s a thought for you. Just let it rattle around in there for a little while.

          Swimming pools, cars, and all the other instruments that cause people to die prematurely: they all serve some other purpose, and death is a generally accidental byproduct of their use. Guns have no other purpose than to kill. When a nutjob opens fire on a room full of kids and kills a bunch of them, the Platonic ideal of “gun” pats itself on the back and says “I’m doing what I’m supposed to.”

        • Ronald Morrison

          How many of those kids were deliberatly drowned? You logic, or lack of it, adds nothing to this conversation.

        • Ross

          Imagine an “NPA” lobby fighting tooth and nail for your “right” to own a pool without a fence and gate around it. And regulations for lifebuoys by your pool? Another assault on your God-given freedoms! Get real.

      • Sarah


    • Sean

      Really Brina? That is the stupidest and most insensitive thing I have heard all day. Why does it matter? The fact is that the guy had an assault rifle and killed 20+ people most of them 6 year old kids.

    • Matt Wallace

      I understand Brina. Although, it really doesn’t matter if the gun was purchased legally or not, because; even if there was a law controlling the purchase of more guns, people still use and OBTAIN them illegally.

      The fools here don’t understand that the law controlling a legal gun purchase isn’t going to change anything. I’m pretty sure there’s also a law that says you’re not allowed to bring a gun into a school and start shooting it at people.

      So, if the shooter doesn’t abide by the laws controlling how guns are obtained, why would they abide by law that says he can’t go into a school and start shooting people?

      • By all means then Matt, let’s not fucking try. Let’s not even attempt to curb how many fucking high-powered weapons are on the ground. You’re right, criminals could still get them. Except, here’s where I get to blow your argument out of the water. The people who commit these crimes are mentally unstable, but they’re not in the mob or a drug cartel. They’re already getting them legally. So maybe if we had stricter regulations in place they couldn’t get them legally and thereby their efforts are thwarted. Sure, they could still go buy one illegally, but do we really think that the ease with which they could purchase these firearms had nothing to do with them actually carrying out their mission?

        But you’re right. Fuck it. Let’s stop trying. We can’t fix it, so let’s just not ever rethink our strategy when it comes to controlling the prevalence of guns in our population. Status quo is TOTES working out for us and the twenty other kids who didn’t live long enough to find out Santa Claus isn’t real.

        • Linda

          Strict gun control or not…..anyone who has a wish to do evil things like this will find a way. I for one am a very sane person who works hard, pays my taxes and wishes to have even the slightest chance to defend myself if I can. If I had been there and had my gun, I would have died trying to save even a few babies before he took me too.

          • You certainly would have died, most likely. Owning a gun and being in a shootout don’t always mean you win. Especially since the kind of gun you’d be legally permitted to conceal wouldn’t have done fuck-all against the gun your assailant was using.

      • Lee

        In 61 mass shootings in the US since 1981, the killer had obtained the guns legally in 49 of them. Do you think that in all those cases, the killer would have gone and bought a gun on the black market? Something tells me no. Most of these whackjobs are not involved in the criminal underworld: like the stereotype, the Sandy Hook murderer “was kind of a loner and shy. He didn’t look you in the eye,” according to his neighbour. Probably not the kind of guy to get up the gumption to risk getting his ass kicked buying a back-alley firearm. But we have guns in the house — shit, we have assault rifles in the house! — and there’s no law that says we have to lock them up or put limits on how many rounds they can fire at a time or anything! Lead us not into temptation.

    • Grannie Cool

      Yea, the guns were legal, They belonged to the mother of the shooter. He used her own guns to kill her. Does that make you feel better ?!

    • Catherine

      according to the info released, yes, the guns were legally purchased by his mother(one of his first victims).
      This would raise the question of if owning a gun for self protection does make you safer

    • Henry Stern

      Who the fuck cares if they were legal or not – they were and that is enough for me. If there were no legal guns this might not have happened. And this is not the first time, columbine, blacksburg etc…..and that statement that guns don’t kill people is hogwash – the existence of guns kill people….Like so many other thing in the government these archaic laws were written for a quite different time and place….they simply do not make sense anymore….

  • Jeremy

    Lets not forget that it wasn’t the guns that killed these innocent children, it was the nut job behind the guns. While I’m all for tighter regulations on weapons, I also hold the belief that even if guns weren’t available, or tougher to get our hands on, killers would still find a way to kill. It’s in their nature. I think it would be just a matter of time before they found other more efficient ways to make their statements. I know it’s unfortunate, but its the truth. No amount of screaming FUCK THE 2nd AMENDMENT is going to help. Nothing will change our constitution. It’s time to stop blaming rules and regulations and *gasp* society for the actions of murdering sociopaths, and begin holding themselves and their parents responsible. You can’t tell me that as parents you can’t tell whether or not your child is sick in the head or perfectly functioning. We need to take responsibility for ourselves and those that we touch on a daily basis. How long was this psychopath crying out for help before the ignorance and selfishness of people drove him to commit this act? 5 years? 10? 15, even? Think about it.

    • Society makes the rules. Blaming the rules is blaming society.

    • Sean

      Jeremy that goes to the heart of the problem. We need to make sure that people purchasing guns aren’t mental cases. Longer waiting periods, better background checks, no access to assault weapons or huge quantities of ammo…things like that. I can get a gun or guns or LOTS of guns easier than a mortgage or a drivers license.

      • Hugh

        Really take me there, I need to protect my family!

    • Kit

      Ok I’m fucking sick of the ” Criminals will still find a way to get guns..” bullshit argument!! The asshole who killed all those people in Colorado in July….he wasn’t a fucking criminal until AFTER those people were fucking dead! Same goes for nearly all these crazy fucking bastards who engage in this behavior. I bet the piece of shit who murdered his mother and 20 Kindergartners wasn’t a mother fucking criminal until TODAY…. so fuck you and your spurious ” guns don’t kill people ” horseshit. Fuck you 26 goddamned times!

    • Grannie Cool

      The 2nd Amendment was to form an Army in a new nation. It is extremely outdated. And it was NEVER meant to give every fool the right to have their own arsenal ! Time to follow the wise example of the UK. No guns = no gun deaths. PERIOD.

    • Lee

      If you’re “all for tighter regulations on weapons” then you’re in agreement with the author of the article.

      You’re absolutely right on one front: we need a better, more responsible culture. It has to come from parents, from community leaders, from celebrities and sports heroes, from each citizen’s inward sense of his or her own worth and his or her sense of dignity and responsibility. But it also has to be reflected in the laws of the land. Without a drastic change to how we collectively view the responsibility of owning weapons that are designed to take lives efficiently, and without good, sensible regulations designed to enforce that responsibility, we will see the tragedies of Sandy Hook and Aurora and Columbine and Virginia Tech over and over and over.

  • Cheryl

    GUNS are not the problem. Our depraved society, where no one is accountable for their actions, where everyone has an excuse for their sick behavior, IS the problem. There were tons of guns in this country back in the day when I attended school and this kind of insane behavior did not occur. It’s the behavior that needs to be addressed, not the instrument.

    • It will take a very long time to root out all the people who need mental help. Comparatively speaking, enacting tighter gun laws would be faster. So how many more shooting deaths do each of our plans of attack potentially create?

  • Tara Marshall

    Like the author of the article said, F- the 2nd Amendment. These kids had more fundamental rights, that go back even further to the Declaration of Independence. They have been deprived of LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

    When you 2nd Amendment gun libbers can GIVE THEM THOSE BACK, then we can debate your ability to have guns without any controls. Until then, your comments go beyond inappropriate into INSULTING to the memories of these dead children.

    DEAD children. Only a little more than a week before Christmas. Their parents have the presents hidden in closets, wrapped. They will never see the looks of delight on their children’s faces. They will never watch their children graduate, get married, have children… all because of an IDIOT with firearms that he apparently obtained completely legally.

  • Loni

    Damn right! This is disturbing as hell and needs to be addressed on a National level. Stop killing each other and children.

    My heart aches right now. I feel like someone took a huge part of hope away from inside of me. People need to come together and stop these Senseless Acts of Violence.

    How would you feel if you had the most important thing taken away from you because some asshole got a hold of some guns!!!! A week before Christmas at an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, in churches, malls, colleges, jobs, and spas. Is it safe to say WE HAVE A HUGE PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF yet?

  • BarryMiami

    The NRA should be very happy to see their policies at work.
    Assault weapons and bullets freely available. The only crazy
    people are not the ones who commit these terrible acts but
    also those who advocate and make possible and pass laws that
    enable the nut cases to have such access. Let’s use this
    tragic loss as a force to change laws and and to challenge
    the NRA and all who support them. Enough! Ban assault weapons. No one needs an automatic rifle to hunt deer. If you can’t hit your mark with one shot at a time, get a bow and arrow; you don’t deserve a gun. If you are reading this, contact your elected officials now, Democrat or Republican, and ask for immediate new legislation banning assault weapons nation wide. May God support and comfort those who lostloved ones today. Let’s act on their behalf.
    And let’s start registering guns; the police need that
    and the NRA should not be able to stop it. No wonder
    they have one of the biggest buildings in Washington. Almost as big as the Saudi Arabian embassy.

    • Kevin Bears

      I live in Northern Va., the NRA has a big building sitting right next to Interstate 66 in Fairfax County. I’ve always dreamed of seeing someone drive by with an automatic assault weapon and just hose that sucker down…

      • BarryMiami

        That’s the one. But let’s bring it down from dis-use; let’s
        re-name it: the Non Relevant Assn!

    • Lance

      these were not fully automatic firearms he used!

      • BarryMiami

        Automatic enough, unfortunately.

        • Hugh


  • Ken

    Couldn’t agree more. I swear…if I read one more comment or post saying that now is not the time to talk about the law I think I’ll scream….

  • kathleen Jones

    Amendment…the right to change anything at any given time. NOW IS THE TIME TO CHANGE THE AMENDENTS OF THE CONSTITUTION!

    • Kevin Bears

      It’s a piece of paper, it can be changed…

  • Matt Wallace

    Yep, and don’t forget:

    -spoons make people fat
    -cars drive drunk
    -pencils misspell words

    You fucktards will never get it. The people using guns in these situations don’t give a shit about the law. Make guns illegal and put up signs everywhere, because the criminals won’t carry guns into a building if there’s a sign saying they can’t… really?!? Law abiding citizens have every right to own them and use them legally; including to protect their families.

    Live in fear you idiots. That’s what the crazy gunmen want.

    • Well, maybe us “Fucktards” don’t get it. You’re right. I mean, I know I don’t get why you feel the need the defend the guns as if they’re the victims. How many guns died today, Matt Wallace? How many guns lost their lives before they even got to first grade? Your sanctimony and piousness in defense of guns is noted, and oh-so-admirable. I’m sure the parents of those guns are happy to know how safe their little gunlets are tonight.

      • Matt Wallace

        It’s not defense of guns. It’s defense of my rights, as a law-abiding citizen, to own as many as I want. My choice is to not be a victim, and, although at times it might be beyond my control, to make sure my family isn’t either.

        You people talk about laws and signs like they’ll really stop a criminal.

        And, you talk about assault weapons. No type of gun is an assault weapon, until it’s used for assault. So, in your eyes, it sounds like every weapon is an assault weapon, b/c it could be used for assault.

        Just like every car is a race car, b/c it could be used to race…. Facts and logic vs. feelings.

        • So again your argument is “I want to own one, and you can’t stop me. And besides, laws never work so why bother trying.”

          You’re 12, right?

          • Kevin Bears

            He’s either 12 or an idiot… or both…

        • Grannie Cool

          The 2nd Amendment was to form an Army in a new nation. It is extremely outdated. And it was NEVER meant to give every fool the right to have their own arsenal ! Time to follow the wise example of the UK. No guns = no gun deaths. PERIOD.

          • Hugh

            Uhm, the idea was to PREVENT the formation of a standing army…

        • Jens

          Oh yes, I love rattle snakes and keep as many as I want in my little apartment. I am responsible and know what I am doing. Would you like to be my neighbor ?
          I am a responsible driver. Never had an accident. Why forcing me to stop at a traffic light? I can see, I know when to stop. Don’t tell me how fast I can drive, I drive fine when I am drunk. It’s my right to do what I want. Would you like to drive around your neighborhood , around your kids?
          I can’t believe us fucktards have to even respond to your “well structured” arguments.
          Every five year old would agree with your “I want it, and I don’t care about the consequences” philosophy.

    • Griffin

      And yet, you folks think it a good idea to outlaw abortion and drugs.

      Either laws are effective and are worth putting in place, or they aren’t. Make up your minds.

      But anyway, I’m sure that if those kids all had guns, they’d still be alive right?

    • Johnny

      Well spoken Matt.

    • Milia

      I would just like to point out the a drunk person in a car does a hell of a lot more damage than one walking and that a person carving a misspelled word into wood can be stopped a hell of a lot quicker than a person writing it with a pencil…

      • Not sure I follow.

        • Milia

          I’m just saying that while you need the people for the deed to be done, the devices used can have an impact. I hate when people say “guns don’t kill people, people kill people,” and i think Matt’s above examples are just as ridiculous. If this guy didn’t have access to a gun, if he walked in with a knife, people may have been hurt, someone may have died… but not so many people, not so many children.

          • Lance

            You will never take guns away, its an impossible act. People will just get them off the street. If they want to commit crimes such as today hell they can get directions on how to build a bomb on the internet. Crazy dominates sanity because sanity is rational, crazy has no boundries.

  • Samantha

    Yeah I can definitely see this whole event stirring up questions about gun control issues. But if you look at Sweden (or is it Switzerland?) almost everyone is armed and they have very little crime. I think its a cultural issue…parenting issue…lack of caring for other humans, over crowding populations, etc. Some people are just socio-paths, perhaps born differently sometimes, and truly don’t value human life, or were raised that way. I don’t know if we honestly can prevent things like this, but perhaps if someone else had a gun there they could have fought back. People also need to teach themselves how to think quickly and react in an emergency but most people freeze up. I don’t know…depressing to say the least. I do believe guns need to be regulated within certain perimeters but let’s also look at America wayyyy back – when every household had a gun. There were not mass shootings or as prevalent as today…its a cultural/societal issue right now and humans have lost touch of reality.

    • Griffin

      An excellent way to make an argument is to not even remember which country it is that you’re talking about.

      You neglect to take into account (probably because you didn’t look it up, as you couldn’t figure out which country you were talking about) the fact that in Switzerland, while there is high gun ownership, ammunition ownership is extremely low – the vast majority of it is only to be distributed if Switzerland is attacked. (Which isn’t really a logistical issue, because Switzerland is tiny.)

      Pretty hard to fire a gun with no bullets.

    • Matt Wallace

      You’re right Samantha. Gun ownership can be a good thing. For example, read about Kennesaw, GA and it’s crime rate stats because of gun ownership requirements:,_Georgia

      • Well shit, if Wikipedia has one statistic to back up your argument, you win! Then again, European countries have insanely strict gun laws. How many more per-capita gun murders did we have in our country last year than Great Britain had?

        • Sara Volk

          GB: 48.
          USA: 10,000.

          • Sara Volk

            Sorry, that was Japan. Great Britain had 8.

    • Ronald Morrison

      The Swiss also have some respect for their governmnet and aren’t afraid of their shadows.

      • Hugh

        because the Swiss don’t deliberately set up schemes to arm drug cartels.

  • BarryMiami

    In the sixties President Johnson established Community Mental Health Clinics nationwide. President Nixon dismantled them. As a Registered Mental Health Counselor (Florida) and as a national crises hotline counselor, I can tell you that the mental health resources in this nation are pitifully lacking. Police, educators and social service agencies do not have the readily available mental health evaluation and counseling centers to which they can take or refer those in need. Possibly, if such resources were available someone along the line might have referred this assailant to one of them for treatment. We must visit this need as a result of today’s tragedy.

    • The mental health system tries but once a person turns 18 there is nothing a parent or other adult can do, the mentally ill person cannot be admitted to a facility because it is against their civil liberties. Civil liberties out the window, if a person exhibits signs of being troubled then doesn’t matter if 18 or 60 be committed for a period of time to see if the person is a danger to themselves or others. The only problem most mentally ill people are very good actor’s, for instance the one in Arizona, sit there staring straight ahead dying his hair red etc. and right away he didn’t know what he was doing. Bull Shit they all know what they are doing why else would they have all those rounds of ammunition with them and dress like some stupid death person. Stand up and yell everyone, it is time to do something, we lost 20 beautiful souls today for no reason at all.

      • BarryMiami

        Interesting comment, but, we do need the mental health resources. The goal is to identify those in need early;
        many can be help, most actually.

      • Tara Marshall

        Actually, if a person is mentally unstable enough, the parents can apply to get guardianship over a person. You should get the process started when the child is 17, and you will be their legal guardian as soon as it is approved.

        This is usually done for people with developmental disabilities, such as a cognitive disability or autism, but it is also applicable for cases of SMI (Severe Mental Illness) in all 50 states.

        • BarryMiami

          Tara, thanks for a professional comment. Many people
          speak as though they know the mental health system and
          are licensed therapists. We need more clinics as resources
          for all charged with educating, policing and treating our
          citizens. No place for arm chair psychologists. If someone
          is having trouble coping, they should be able to see a
          mental health professional as warranted by the situation.
          This would help with our homeless many of whom are suffering
          from mental illness or substance abuse. If we have these
          resources available, including for school age children, we
          will see a decline in disturbed behavior.

  • Bishop Andrew Gerales Gentry

    The indisputable fact is that guns are made to kill and those who insist that they are made for any other reason are fools. Some insist that it is only for target practice that they are made. well target practice has one goal and that is to make you a better shot and a better shot means you are a more efficient killer. Gun owners can rationalize the ownership anyway that makes their anemic moral character comfortable but again it is an instrument of death and the more available guns are the more people die! If your insultingly silly pathetic attempt at logic is to insist that it is people who kill and not guns there is no hope for you or the rest of the Republic! If, God forbid ,a child of yours dies becuase someone had a gun with which to kill them becuase people like you insisted that guns are a right, I hope you find comfort in that insanity but somehow I think you would not!

  • Hannah

    I am not sending my child to school next week. In fact, I am keeping her out until the New Year. I wonder if everybody boycotted schools and malls until something was done about the guns, would it make a difference?

    • Lance

      No it wouldnt, unfortunately!

  • James Guy

    @James First and foremost your piece was well written and spoken. However, in response to a few of your comments you have posted on here I do feel that some clarification needs to be made. First off, one cannot make the assertion that were ‘guns’ illegal this would not have happened. This individual, seems to me, mentally unstable enough to try this no matter what, he would have done this with a knife( ), an Ax, or a bomb (Which can be easily fashioned at home IE, the first world trade center bombing or the Oklahoma City Bombing). The greater issue to consider is WHY we have the 2nd amendment. It was put in place as a measure to ensure that the people could protect them selves from the government. Now, while I am far from saying that the Government is coming to get us, who is to say that will not happen in 10 years, or 20, when your children wished they had firearms to fight against tyranny. As far as your comment about European countries weapons statistics; now I know it is not quite a 100% fair comparison but we here could institute a compulsory service system. On the flat out banning of weapons (Which I again understand that you are not demanding but more of a limitation to ownership) Let us look at Australia: and this site as well . This is kinda the sum of my retort. I completely understand your side and, to an extent, agree with you, But overall I am unwilling to sacrifice a little freedom for a little security, in line with the thoughts of Benjamin Franklin: “Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one” Thank you for reading

  • xicota

    “…to own as many as I want.” For Krissake, how many do you want? How many does the weirdo down the street with the overgrown lawn want? How many does your dentist want? How many do you think you need? There are people out there who apparently collect them like Barbie clothes. I don’t have a problem with the essence of the 2nd Amendment (I own a gun). “No type of gun is an assault weapon, unless it’s used for assault”? I see, then it must be just a weapon. Semantics.

  • The schools in our nation are becoming a target for terrorism. I guess I’m not understanding why the schools are not as secure as our court houses, jails and airports? Heck even the corner market has security cameras… I think it should be made a standard proceedure, no matter who you are that you are greeted by security personnel, place all your items in the basket to be xrayed, remove your shoes, walk through the metal detector, be scanned by a handheld detector and screened in such a way as to detect any possible danger… this has happened too many times at schools all across this country… and it shouln’t be. As much as a pita it would be to have to go through all this it would be far less traumatizing then having some nut bud going in and killing innocent children…
    lock up the schools for the entire school day, employ security guards, screen everyone and anyone who comes in the school while students are attending classes and extracurricular activities. sorry but they do it everywhere else that terrorizers have been and killed, we are responsible to protect the children at any cost. the government found the money to bail out the banks and auto makers, FIND the resources needed to provide HIGH ALERT SECURITY at ALL TIMES at ALL SCHOOLS!! Guns can be controlled and contrabanned by law ( I do not agree that we should loose our right to bear arms) and you will still have outrageous acts of insanity such as the horror of todays mass shooting, the gun did not choose its victims.
    If we were to make it a law to provide security as astringent as they have in the courthouse, jails and airports ( something that should have happened long ago in the aftermath of Columbine) it would be impossible for someone to get into a school with anything to do any harm to children… or any students and teachers…at any educational institution…

    • Yes. In lieu of maturity, wisdom and prudence, we create a POLICE STATE AT OUR SCHOOLS.

      Makes a lot of sense to me…

  • and as far as gun controll issues are concerned, if there were to be a rash of killings by pitch fork, kitchen knife, or what have you… pick your murder weapon… would you campaign to outlaw sales of pitchforks? I grew up knowing that a gun was a dangerous weapon, and yet a useful tool. Lamps have been used to kill by blunt force trauma… any object including a persons own hands can be used to commit murder. So taking away our right to bear arms would not put an end to senseless slaughter…

    • Lee

      “The right to keep and bear arms” in order to support “a well-regulated militia” does not mean that anyone should be allowed any kind or amount of weapons to keep and bear. The Second Amendment has never been interpreted to mean that individuals should carry on their person, say, chemical weapons or hand grenades. Nor does the Amendment specifically sanction guns, just “arms”.

      What it DOES mention is regulation. Why is that such a difficult thing to get our collective head around? Why, in the wake of thousands of firearm deaths per year – many, many times more than any country not engulfed by war – and countless strings of massacres in public places, is our right to life and liberty constantly being tyrannized by a bizarre interpretation of this Amendment? Why can’t we understand that guns DO kill people? Lots and lots of them, far more than any hypothetical rash of farm-implement killings ever could. That’s the only thing that guns exist for: killing.

      And you know what? If every two-bit town in America had a pitchfork store or two, and bigger towns had more, and cities had a LOT of stores that only sold pitchforks, and there grew in the nation an epidemic of pitchfork masssacres, and everybody knew that the reason many people bought these pitchforks was to stab other people – with children too many of the victims – I bet it would seem reasonable to most folks if we collectively said, “Hang on a minute. Do you think we might have a LOT fewer pitchfork deaths if we only sold them to farmers, and the farmer had to wait a while before he got to take one home, and in the meantime he had to take some safety training on the thing, and let’s make sure he’s not obviously unstable and going to go out and stab a bunch of people to death with it?” Don’t you think that would be reasonable?

      • Jens

        brilliant post Lee btw.

    • VVHalf

      Hahaha, mass murder by lamp!

      • Hugh

        Have you forgotten that it’s only been about 120 years that lamps have been powered by electricity, prior to that oil, FLAMMABLE oil. Many mass killings have been done with fire…

        • Lee


    • Jens

      Hi Theresa,
      please explain to me the useful tool a gun can be (skip the hunting bit where free roaming forest dwellers in the Rocky Mountains have to hunt with their automatic guns to feed their families because the next Wal-Mart is just too far away).
      I love to hear about those happy childhood memories when you first learned how to load a gun, and how to pull the trigger at that hoody wearing property intruder (nanny will explain later how to use a phone and 911, you’re just too young for that right now). I hope you were not too afraid of the awesome killer-lamp you got for your Militia Barbie dream house that one Christmas.
      So your argument is that the guy in CT would have killed those 26 people no matter what. With a lamp, a rubber chicken, his bare hands or through verbal insults (slowly wearing them down).
      Do I have to use even heavier sarcasm or would it be enough for you to just re-read your own post (or any of your likeminded friend’s comments here) to see how silly they are?
      Just to see if I understand your points. It’s like:
      – Many diseases kill people, so why fight cancer? It’s a losing battle. If cancer doesn’t get you, something else will. Like the equally common plague (or know as” death by lamp”).
      -Why prosecute murder? It hasn’t stopped people kill each other. No point really. Victim’s already gone; prison or death sentence hasn’t stopped it. Just except that people are evil and hope it’s not going to be you (since you own an AK47).
      -Traditions are great. I often think about the precious times we called the Wild West. Everyone carried a gun. Life was safe and peaceful then (except those pesky US marshals and their government intruding need for justice).

      • Hugh

        “… a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen…” — Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)

        “Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others. Instead, their duty is to preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general public.” — US Supreme Court 1989

  • jay

    Just curious why your not saying the same thing about knives? Have you not heard about the knife attack in China today at a school? 20 people killed all but one children so far reported. Guess we need stricter laws on them also. It is very sad….way to many lost today…but it goes to show if someone wants to do harm they will find a way.

    • Because 20 children were murdered today in Connecticut. If you need to know about that story, see above.

    • ra kite

      Those 20 children attacked in China by KNIVES were NOT killed. One child died.

      Guns are ONLY for killing. This fact trumps all other. They should be regulated – heavily. Clearly the private ownership of guns in this case did not make this family safer. Amazing, work your NRA gun marketing logic on that one.

      • Hugh

        tell that to the little old lady when a 200 lb thug is trying to rape or kill her with his bare hands, so she should just let him? she doesn’t deserve the best means to defend herself??

        • Ross

          Pathetic Hugh, show me this little old lady. What a heart-wrenching story.

          • Hugh

            Well apparently you didn’t get the point that firearms can give the disabled, women & others an equalizing chance to survive being raped or murdered. Or do you feel it’s morally better to allow them to be brutally raped & murdered?So caring & compassionate!

          • Lee

            1) I don’t think anyone believes that the Second Amendment is going to be repealed anytime soon; we’ve interpreted it to mean that citizens have a natural right of self-defense through ownership of firearms. So granny gets to keep her Colt, and you can relax. But why can’t we even talk about tighter controls?

            2) Power to the powerless is what guns do well: that’s a very good point. That’s why they’re the weapon of choice for the mentally disturbed social outcasts who tend to perpetrate these atrocities.

  • Ron

    Knife rampage in Japan ….22 injured ……0 dead…
    Gun rampage in CT USA …. 0 injured ….28 dead ….

  • George

    In a perfect world banning guns may make sense. But this is not a perfect world. Mexico has very strict gun control laws. It is now ruled by Drug Cartels. They commit atrocities to children far worse than this tragedy.

  • Lance

    Let me first say i agree that this was a horrible tragedy that no community should have to endure. Now because it was done with firearms are we just gonna throw away the constitution and call it meaningless or outdated? No these rights were given to us to protect us from the governement. Next question, if we repeal the second amendment and turn over our leagally registered and properly and responsibly owned arms, what happens when you have a home invasion which is one of the fastest growing crimes if you do your research, now you have no means to protect your family would you immediately call for a right to bear arms in your household? Ultimately it the responsible user that amendment was written for, not idiots that could aquire these same weapons on the street, just like pills, pot, meth, cocaine, heroin or any other illegal drug. I dont see guns stealing cars, raping women, invading occupied homes, molesting children feel free to stop me anytime…. Lets let the shock wear off then take a look at steps that can be taken to prevent these things from happening in the future. The government would love nothing more then for all of us to just hand over the constitution. We as a country are better then this.

    • Jens

      There must be total anarchy all over the world in those countries with no guns available to the public. How do those poor people defend themselves? Murder must be rampart during every part of the day since no one can pull a gun to defend their lives. Do you even feel the stupid creeping up your spine when you make arguments like “we need more guns to defend us against guns?” I lived in 4 different countries during my life and never even thought about needing a gun. If faced with crime you call the police ( and when I lived in the UK, even the police showed up WITHOUT guns). I have news for you: The earth is NOT flat, the second amendment did not come directly from god and yes ” guns do kill people “

      • Hugh

        Why don’t you go to china & become a political dissadent, then wonder why you’ve been place into a truck with armed soldiers driving way out into the country with others with bound hands…

        • Jens

          So without you and Mr. Smith having 12 AK47’s in the garage, we would be China or Nazi Germany? You are giving very little credit to anything the US is standing for. I didn’t know I was living in a just slightly cleaner form of Somalia if it wasn’t for you guys.
          Well, I guess I just have to thank you for keeping our oppressive government in check for us. I am sure every President (only the Democrat ones of course) was just ready to open concentration camps, but too afraid you would come out of the woodworks to fight the US military with your huge arsenal of fire arms.
          Let’s amend the second amendment to give every citizen the right to own a Tank. I am sure the increase of deaths during road rage due to the use of missiles cannot be linked to those new tanks (tanks don’t kill people, people do). As an added bonus it would avoid the last bit of compassion those crazy killers may feel when looking into the eyes of their shooting victims. It’s even easier to roll over a 5year old with a tank in the name of freedom.

  • Mike

    A-fucking-MEN bro. Hugs and Prayers don’t do shit. We need action!

  • Hugh

    The KEY ponit is, strict gun control laws are ALREADY IN PLACE AND THEY HAVE NOT WORKED!
    What makes these anti-gun/gun-grabber types actually believe that even MORE STRICT laws are going to net a different/better result?

    The AR-15 (AR stands for ARMALITE) rifle was left in his vehicle & not used. The handguns he used were in his mother’s name. And according to federal law, anyone who leaves a firearm where a child can access it, is guilty of a felony.

    • The key point is that you feel your right to a gun supersedes my children’s rights to not be killed by one.

      • Hugh

        If your logic were to follow reason, swimming pools & automobliesmust be outlawed for more children are killed from either one a hundred fold! My right to keep & bear arms protects your right to be able to make such innocuous statements

        • Lee

          1) By the standards of any first-world country, the gun control laws of the USA are anything but strict. It’s telling that other countries, such as Brazil, that have a citizenry that views personal gun ownership for self-defense as a right, are also countries where death by firearm is all too common.

          2) Plenty – some couple billion – people live in countries where BOTH a) access to firearms by the general public is either severely limited or nonexistent AND b) citizens have the right to statements even less “innocuous” (?) than James’s above. Freedom of speech is not defended by every asshole on the block owning an AK-47; it is defended by maintaining democratic engagement and vigilance.

          2) When mass killings take place via driving automobiles into schoolyards or (somehow) deliberately drowning a class of kindergarteners, I will accept your proposition that more stringent regulations and safeguards need to be enforced to prevent this. That was your point, right?

          3) I don’t know why, but it seems to escape you Ted Nugent-worshipping flat-earthers that the Second Amendment doesn’t mention guns, but it does mention regulation. There is a middle ground between the current insane situation and completely stripping Americans of their beloved firearms. Get your head out of your tinfoil hat for a second and consider it.

  • Jens

    Reading some of the comments and arguments of the defenders of the great freedom to own equipment purely designed for killing makes me really wonder how they are able to hold an entire nation hostage to their view point. I am not even sure how to respond to arguments so dumb, illogical, primitive, self centered, miss proven, ignorant and I could go on and on. It’s like discussing the positive side of slavery with someone. Pls wake up America. I am not sure a beloved gun will make a good substitute for a lost child, and I truly hope all you gun lovers will never have to find out.

    • Hugh

      And we will defend to the the last gunowner for your right to express your views in the last country in which you have freedom of speech. For example in britian, people are being prohibited about talking about Princess Diane.

      • Jens

        Hugh, oh Hugh.
        How did someone who is obviously able to make some coherent points end up with such ludicrous arguments? Is it that you really never been outside the States (please don’t list all the countries you’ve visited, I try to give you points for ignorance that’s all you really have).
        Sell one of your guns and buy a ticket to almost any country in Europe or any other western country in the world (yes there’s more out there). Hell, for the price of a couple of freedom defending, armor piercing bullets you could get a bus ticket to communist Canada.
        Maybe you could talk to some of the freedom fighters in the tower of London who are tortured for making a Princes Diana joke and organize a fully armed militia in the woods of Sherwood Forest to spread the gospel of happiness through gun ownership in all those primitive cultures.
        I heard Belgium can’t wait to get their gun related deaths up to the US standards.

        • Hugh

          “… a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen… — Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)

          “Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others. Instead, their duty is to preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general public. — US Supreme Court 1989

          • Jens

            Did I really say before that you are able to make some coherent points? Well, let me take that back. You must have sniffed too much of your gun oil. This is now the point where trying to listen to your arguments is like the second amendment: Pointless.

          • Hugh

            Maybe it’s that you have NOT smelled any gun oil, Go to the range and shoot a few rounds & get all that judgmental hate & spite out of your system!

          • Jens

            I am pretty sure every victim of gun violence would prefer my verbal hate and contempt over the bullet they took, so you can enjoy the freedom to (as you put it) “shoot some rounds”.

  • 2nd Amendment

    If I were a tyrannical government I would want to disarm the people of my nation like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao did in theirs. Because we all know that if the people are armed a tyrannical government cannot reach its full potential. To disarm them would be a drawn out task taking years or decades depending how their society looked upon firearms. If I were a tyrannical government I would study the effects of mind altering drugs on human beings. I would study how the mind of a person worked and attempt to see if like a computer it could be programmed to carry out tasks. I would want to see if I could create different personalities in the human mind, like partitions in a computer hard drive, that could be switched to on command. If I were a tyrannical government I would create several of these programmed people and leave them to go about their daily lives until I decided to flip the chaos switch I programmed into their heads. The people around them would remark how they never would have suspected that the person could have carried out such atrocities. If I were a tyrannical government I would start slowly and increase in frequency until I hit the unsuspecting people where they were most vulnerable. If I were a tyrannical government I would strike at their children where they were thought to be safe and then I would wait for them to beg me to take away their firearms. I would oblige my people amazed at how easy it was as they hung themselves without even realizing it. If I were a tyrannical government I could then raise taxes to whatever I wanted. I could suspend elections. I could censor free speech and the internet. I could take away my citizen’s homes or businesses without compensation. I could enact laws as I saw fit without the approval of the people. I could ethnically cleanse the nation of people I deemed lesser than the rest. I could turn my citizens into slaves. I could murder protesters in the streets for not agreeing with my views. If I were a tyrannical government with all the guns none of my subjects could oppose me.

    • The Tin Foil Hatter called. You’re due for your next appointment.

    • Jens

      If you have a clear moment when you don’t hear voices in your head, please re read your post and see if almost any of what you wrote was written by someone you want to have guns in the first place.
      I could try and address each of your points (?), but I think we need to stop talking to nutjobs like yourself and let you get on with watching and cheering Doomsday Preppers on TV.
      It just doesn’t help to cater to most of the pro gun people (which is a way to kind label to give them) posting here or voicing their opinion at rallies.
      We need to start talking to the silent majority (I hope)and have them use their common sense and not have them intimidated by crazy arguments or powerful lobbies.

  • Uffe

    Something is very wrong with the laws you have over there, when normal citizens are allowed to get these weapons so easy. How come your country think it´s a right for every citizen to own a weapon made for war? And yes, I´m not from the USA, I´m from a country in europe called Sweden. I think it´s sad to hear about all the shootings you have, it´s crazy. Of course these things happen if everybody owns a gun, and are allowed to. This isn´t a video game, this is real, and scary. Today my thoughts goes to all the parents. Not to people who claim their right to have a weapon, that´s just pathetic.

  • Samantha

    I do believe that if his mum didn’t have a gun then he wouldn’t of got hold of one….. I don’t own a gun, we are not allowed too here in the UK!! I feel safe in my home all the time but wow the thought of having a gun in my house makes me sick. I have never even seen a gun and I am 35 years old.. A gun in my home under the same roof as my children NOOO… It turns my stomach just thinking about those who were sadly taken away from there family’s… Sorry but I think it’s disgusting having guns in your home, why do you have to be in fear in your own home… All it takes is for a parent to have a gun and not know that there child is sick in the head and you have given them access to a gun!! Oh isn’t that what has just happened???? I don’t understand anything about the second amendment I don’t know anything much about US law at all to be honest but I do know children died yesterday and that is one big fucked up issue!!! Yes you do need better laws on guns….. All those presents already wrapped up and ready for those children for Christmas day… I am sorry for all the families xsx

    • Hugh

      London is a haven of safe homes isn’t it? Just ask Madonna when her family was robbed @ gunpoint there.

      • Lee

        That scenario probably would have turned out a lot better if Madonna and Guy had been packing heat, wouldn’t it?

  • Arvid Wam Solvang
    • Hugh

      They also didn’t have the rioting & looting that we have here in the U.S., which often is done by the welfare entitlement crowd…

  • LaVelle

    This is what the Second Amendment reads. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    So here is my point, every gun owner needs to belong to a militia where gun safety, law, storage, and use is emphasized. If you own a gun, you are also part of a militia that you participate in with monthly meetings. Let’s match gun ownership to the Constitution.

    • Hugh

      yes, everyone needs training in the handling and of arms.

  • Jessica


    As passed by the Congress:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.[8]

    ANYONE CONFUSED? LET ME HELP YOU: regulated past participle, past tense of reg·u·late (Verb)
    Control or maintain the rate or speed of (a machine or process) so that it operates properly.
    Control or supervise (something, esp. a company or business activity) by means of rules and regulations.

    • Bishop Andrew Gerales Gentry

      For all you over fed under-read rednecks who can’t walk a quarter of a mile much less run one especially with a full compliment of ordinance and who are nothing more than John Wayne role wannabees. You who harbor the imbecilic notion that the Second Amendment makes you into a self appointed “patriot” minuteman defending yourselves against “the government” and the U S Military just remember the Confederacy with hundreds of well trained divisions of militia(many thousands of men) tried that and lost. Do you think you honestly can defeat the U S Army or Marine Corp let alone the U S Navy and Air Force or Coast Guard? Do you, who would not know the Constitution if it hit you over the head honestly think you can defeat drones and other smart weapons? No there is no such thing as a Second Amendment guard against a central or any other government. Go back to school, learn to read and get a life. By the way please realize that there are no cowboys left or minutemen just cheap imitations of ones!

  • CJT

    As usual, a well-written and argued piece but if the near-death of former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords at the hands of a crazed gunman couldn’t affect any real change or dialogue with respect to gun control then I’m not too optimistic this will either. An op-ed published yesterday in the NYT by Mr. Gregory Gibson ( is the most honest assessment I’ve read yet:

    “I came to realize that, in essence, this is the way we in America want things to be. We want our freedom, and we want our firearms, and if we have to endure the occasional school shooting, so be it. A terrible shame, but hey — didn’t some guy in China just do the same thing with a knife?”

    I fear this is our reality and, for better or worse, Mr. Gibson seems to be among the few with the balls to admit as much.

  • henny

    Deleting people from your Facebook page for telling the truth isn’t cool. Anyone who think Thomas Jefferson would agree with this fool is a fool. Auroa was a set up. Proven. Look into Peter Lanza. This may very well b a set up too. Let facts come before jumping to moronic conclusions.

    • Nothing was “proven” about Aurora yet. Go wash your tin foil and never come back here again. Seriously. You’re an idiot. Usually I try to be fair to people no matter how bat shit crazy they are, but you’ve hit my limit for dealing with idiots. Bye, henny.

      • Hugh

        True nothing has been proven yet, but that hasn’t stopped the fear mongering from further attempting to disarm nonviolent law abiding gunowners. So if guns are banned what next, kitchen knives? can openers? screwdrivers? Rocks have been used to kill people since before language was invented!

        Which brings to mind what a former white supremist said that caused him to leave “the movement.” He posed a hypothetical question to a fellow memeber, “Say we do suceed in abolish the mud races, what then?” to which the reply was, with all seriousness, “Eye color.”

        Where does it end?

  • David Little

    A well armed and regulated militia in these times happen to be your states National Guard.There should be stricter controls on gun ownership, like close the gun show loophole for one. Gun enthusiast should only be allowed to have military grade weapons at an approved range. As to arming and expecting teachers to handle a situation like Newtown requires training lots of training. Train the teachers but cut their salaries good luck with that. Now is the time and I believe we should discuss the solutions as sane adults and come up with a practical solution we can’t keep going like this it’s unacceptable and unsustainable.

    • Hugh

      Ah, the mysterious “gunshow loophole!” What is, the gunshow loophole? everyone talks about it, but no one can identify it!

      What do Santa Claus, the tooth fairy the easter bunny, job creators & the gunshow loophole have in common?

      They’re all ficticious!

    • Hugh

      The National Guard was not even dreamt of when the constitution was written. You, your neighbors, & myself, “WE” are the milita! The constitution was written to protect the people from a government run roughshod over the citizenry. It has NEVER been about hunting or trap shooting, it’s to prevent what happened in germany 70+ years ago!

    • Milehisnk

      Actually, a well regulated militia meant a regular or common militia. By definition, a militia are armed civilians who are not paid for their service. The national guard are paid for their service, so they are not a militia.

      Blame the Brady campaign.
      Now, here’s my question. What defines “military grade weapons”? Is it the AR-15, which is not used by a single armed serviceman except in their personal collection, was originally designed as a civilian weapon that was later adopted by the military (not the other way around)? Technically, muskets were military grade weapons too, so should we not have those?

      • How about we cut the bullshit over arguing semantics as to what constitutes a military grade weapon and concentrate on the fact that these guns fire hundreds of rounds a minute? I know, you gun boner types feel like you have the intellectual upper hand when you trot out irrelevant shit like what the actual definition of a firearm is. But I ask you this: do you think any of those twenty kids or their parents give a flying fuck about your snotty insistence that we call a gun by a certain nomenclature or not?

        • Hugh

          “gun boner types” REALLY???

      • Ross

        The AR-15 is quite in use in the IDF and like every other firearm in Israel, strictly regulated. and Hugh, shut the fuck up.

  • Chris

    Enough Said….

  • Hugh

    So why the F are we not mourning but throwing blame at people that who were not there?

  • Hugh


    In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armen ians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
    China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated
    Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    —- ————- ————-
    Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
    You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
    Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.
    Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late!
    The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.
    With guns, we are ‘citizens’. Without them, we are ‘subjects’.
    During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
    If you value your freedom, please spread this antigun-control message to all of your friends.
    I’m a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!

    • Jens

      You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

      I wonder why this is. Maybe because the only thing a politician fears more than losing re-election, is to being seen as a total moron.
      I really hope you’re just having a stroke right now, and don’t truly believe that the numbers and information you mention here have ANYTHING to do with trying to create a positive effect of gun ownership.
      I’ve been called a peace loving sissy more than once and am surprised about myself saying this but sometimes I simply think it’s time for people like yourself to release the safety on your gun, load it up and start cleaning thoroughly while looking at the barrel. That could be one gun violence statistic I could live with (I know I lost the argument at this point with some reasonable people here, sorry).

      • Hugh

        You know, for a so called “peace loving sissy” you sure are filled with hate & contempt.

        And as John said, “instant karma’s gonna get you!”

      • Rachel

        I understand your frustration, Jens; it’s impossible to have a completely sane discussion with an insane person.

    • Lee

      From the obviously pro-gun Wikipedia article about gun ownership in Switzerland:

      “The low incidence of gun crime in Switzerland is sometimes attributed to the fact that Switzerland is wealthy but also isolated. Social problems associated with gun crime in other industrialised countries, such as drugs or urban deprivation, are not widespread. Swiss men and women learn from an early age to associate firearms with defense of their country. While Switzerland has a strong ‘Gun Culture’, and hunting is popular, the high level of support for guns in the home is largely based around the fact that Militia service is such a strong part of Swiss society. In Switzerland the vast majority of gun related deaths are from suicide rather than homicide.”

      With the exception of the last sentence, do you see anything in that paragraph that remotely resembles the situation here? (In the US, suicide by firearm is also more common than murder by firearm.) I see the Swiss model as a much truer reflection of the Second Amendment than the abortion we’ve made of it.

      Well regulated militia. Repeat ad nauseam.

    • Lee

      And a personal, totally non-rhetorical question for you, Hugh. I really want to know the answer.

      Do you actually believe that the US government has or ever will have the long-term objective of rounding up and exterminating its citizenry?

      • Sleepy J Ranch

        @Lee, our police are having less and less respect for law-abiding citizens and treat everyone like criminals. With that mindset, lets look at our prisons-for profit. People are being imprisoned for years for minor offences. We are already locking up people that are not a danger to others. What do you think? What did the people in the other countries think before they were disarmed? We all usually respond with disbelief when faced with evil.

        • Lee

          Geez, do you think the fact that the police are tending to treat regular citizens like dangerous criminals might have anything to do with the fact that more and more people are carrying guns on their persons?

          I fully agree that our prison system is an atrocity. I can’t imagine why we thought it was a good idea to run them for profit.

          But it’s too big a leap from “the prison-industrial lobby is putting pressure on lawmakers to enforce longer terms for lesser crimes in order to make a buck” to “the people we elected are planning to round us up and ship us to death camps in Nevada.” I don’t buy it for one second.

          Democratic engagement is a more effective prophylactic against tyranny than any number of militias, no matter how well regulated, could ever be. And democratic engagement is not going to walk into an elementary school and murder your children.

          • BarryMiami

            “our police are having less and less respect for law-abiding citizens and treat everyone like criminals.”

            Garbage! Our police are becoming more professional, better
            educated,better paid and more effective. This comment only
            reflects what can and will go wrong; you do not hear about
            the sophisticated and well thought out, pro-active plans of well trained officers and staff. Crime rates are and have been dropping. So don’t accept such a judgement by an uninformed know-it-all.

            One real problem is the lack of mental health resources in
            this nation. That is where we should be looking.

          • Hugh

            Barry Miami, The cops are better equipt as well they now have armored personnel carrriers some with large caliber fully auto machine guns.Eeven the patrol cops have M16 (the military full auot version of the AR15, which is semi-auto.)

          • BarryMiami


  • Sleepy J Ranch

    These guys are reacting without engaging their brains. Until they have been in fear of their lives and had the good fortune to have a gun in their posession, they will never understand that weapons save innocent lives.

    • Hugh

      I pray the will have the common sense to realize that we must be proactive by doing away with the so called gun-free zones & having defenders with arms in place BEFORE the next mentally ill/psychopath goes off his meds!

      • Matt Wallace


        To all you people offering up solutions to this tragedy, there isn’t one.

        Evil people exist. They always will. Some people are simply born broken. They want to rape, kill, hurt… whatever.

        You can prepare for them, look out for them, and do your best to be vigilant; but you can’t legislate something or counsel them not to be broken and expect to prevent tragedy.

  • Milehisnk

    Now it’s time to do something. Absolutely. First, let’s start with the facts.

    From 1927 to 1989, there were 16 mass killings in schools. This prompted our legislators to create the gun free schools zone act in 1990. Since then, there has been 106 mass shootings in schools.

    Since 1989, a study was done on 29 mass school shootings. 14 of them, nobody reacted to stop the threat but the police, 15 had faculty, staff or others react.

    In the 14 where police were the only stop, 200 people died. That’s roughly 13.5 deaths per incident.

    In the 15 where someone else interjected, 35 people died.
    That’s roughly 2.3 deaths per incident.

    Also, only 5 of those 15 incidents were the responders armed. Those 5 incidents had an average death rate of 1.6. The 10 where the good guys did not have weapons, there was 2.6 deaths per incident.

    Until 1986, you could buy brand new fully automatic rifles. Until 1968, anyone who wasn’t in prison could buy a gun, and have it shipped to their house, no background checks, no FFL dealer necessary, and yet these shootings didn’t hardly occur. Clearly we have a problem with morality in our society, or a lack thereof, and not a firearms problem.

    • Funny. I think there’s absolutely no morality in selfishly protecting your right to be able to blow people away over twenty kids’ rights not to be blown away. Different strokes, I guess though, right Gun Guy McGee?

      • Hugh

        I find it really disturbing that as the laws have become more & more restrictive, the incidents have conversly become more & more frequent! How is it that it works that way? Chicago & Washington D.C. have soome of the most restrictive laws regarding firearms And the highest gun death rates. Kennesaw GA. has laws mandating all households (non felony exempted) & yet they have some of the LOWEST crime rates???

        • Lee

          Actually, Hugh, although there’s a bit of push and pull, the trend in recent years in a majority of states has definitely been toward less restriction, so the persecution card won’t play. Gun ownership nationwide has been massively on the upswing, which should make you happy. Yet, as you point out, the frequency of mass shootings has increased. How is it that it works that way?

    • Lee

      Do you know where I can find a copy of that study, Milehisnk?


    I’m screaming for you, America. Be the change you wish to see in the world, since you’re an empire (guess what?) you’ll see it!

    May those children and all other victims of gun violence find peace while you all should give some meaning to what they represented. Six years old, fuck that… Let them be what changed the constitution what the hell else did they get? Not even Santa this year…

    DROP THE WEAPONS! Help each other up, be a nation instead of some divided hateful place the world now sees you as.

  • Matt Wallace

    To all you people offering up solutions to this tragedy, there isn’t one.

    Evil people exist. They always will. Some people are simply born broken. They want to rape, kill, hurt… whatever.

    You can prepare for them, look out for them, and do your best to be vigilant; but you can’t legislate something or counsel them not to be broken and expect to prevent tragedy.

    • Jens

      Yes you can. Evil people exist everywhere not just in the US. We are just making it easier for evil people to be more destructive.
      The mother in this case wasn’t crazy (I assume), she registered her legal weapons and made sure her kids knew how to handle them safely. Let’s look at the crazy in this case. If he hadn’t had access to moms little self-defense collection, he would have gone to the neighbor’s house and stolen theirs (legal, responsible gun owners). If that hadn’t worked (due to gun law restrictions) he would have gone to Wal-Mart or to one of the easy access gun shows. If those wouldn’t have been there (due to gun law restrictions) he would have had to go to the black market. Assuming that the underground gun trade in Newtown CT is easy to find and thriving, we could have reached a point in our little story where he could succeed. If the bad guys had some stolen guns available that is (after all even they have to get the guns from somewhere). We could follow that logic further (if we really have to, do we?).
      You guys have a point: Guns don’t kill people, People kill people
      and people could still kill people.
      To say: Guns don’t shoot people, people shoot people. It would be impossible to say that without a gun involved, and in my world that would be a pretty good goal to achieve to save some lives.

      • Hugh

        Again someone who believes “He would have gone to Wal-Mart or to one of the easy access gun shows.” Jen have you ever gone through the process of purchasing a firearm? The same laws that apply to “REAL” gun stores also apply to Wally mart & all firearms dealers @ gunshows.

        • Jens

          And the point is? With millions of guns legally in the US, getting a gun is obviously not that hard (Wal-Mart was purely used as an example, use ACME Gun store instead if it makes more sense to you).
          There aren’t two separate gun manufactures in the USA. One for responsible gun owners and one for the evil do-ers. By shutting down gun availability through responsible laws, guns will eventually become less of a problem (see almost every civilized country).

    • BarryMiami

      “you can’t … counsel them not to be broken and expect to prevent tragedy.”

      Really. And where did you receive your training in clinical
      psychology and what are your references for such a conclusion?. Sir, talk about something you really know about.
      Mental health is a science and an art; it can and does work.
      The same way traditional physical medicine works. And mental
      health counseling should be readily available to all.

  • susan moss

    NO GUNS. NO WHERE. Killing is Killing. And I believe each and everyone of us is capable of it, mentally ill or not.

  • venkat

    Very well said.100% agree with you. I am an indian and almost all the people in our country does not support guns and here in usa, there are lot of people who are pro guns.What type of peoople are here in usa. Looks like they dont have a heart, even after knowing the kids died in the shooting.Please change your thinking. if you want to give guns to everybody, then give nukes to all countries. Your logic is ,bad guys get guns anyway even after banning guns.This is not true .In usa most of the shootings were not done by bad guys and they dont have criminal background before.People does these killings when they are emotionally disturbed and if the guns are not accessible to them at that time, most of the crimes can be averted.Thank you author. I am your fan.Ban NRA

  • Proud_to_be_American

    Here’s what happens when you DO have a gun on a school campus when the nutbag comes in!

  • Robert

    You go fuck yourself. We used to not have children shooting each other in schools and we had plenty of guns then. The only difference is that we did not teach children to defy their parents in school back then. A child knew that if they even thought about touching one of their parents guns, it would be butt whooping time. Just like every other plague that we have allowed our children to get involved in these days because we are too “forward” thinking to give them a good old fashioned spanking. If you take away the guns, they’ll just find another avenue to carry out their violence. It’s not a gun problem, its a we’ve lost control of our children problem. Our Constitution is sacred. Don’t like it? MOVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have that right.

    • Political Garbage

      Okay okay. We’ll get off your lawn, Gramps.

    • Ryan Sample

      1) Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are more sacred than the 2nd Amendment.

      2) A person would need to be completely batshit insane to use a knife or a bat to kill someone. However, with a gun, you just pull on a “trigger” and people die. It’s only a few pounds of force on the trigger, and anything in front of you dies. If that is the case, if people couldn’t get guns, and they weren’t nuts enough to use a knife or something like that, then they would probably decide to not kill people.

      3) You implicitly imply you are against being forward-thinking. If that is correct, then you have accidentally implied that you are against progress, which gave us stuff like penicillin, vaccines and assault rifles.

      • Robert

        Oh, trust me I was being facetious when I referenced this so-called “forward thinking” that the liberal left uses as an excuse for destroying what America was built on. You are not being very forward thinking yourself if you really think your “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” are safe if you allow any faction of the govt, be they Democrat or Republican, to start meddling with the fundamentals of the U.S. Constitution. Gun Control is only the tip of the iceberg. Already there have been bills circulated in the Senate which would imprison you for speaking critically of Washington politicians. I believe that’s a violation of your first amendment freedom of speech right. The NSA is keeping closer tabs on Americans’ cell phone conversations than they are new terrorist organizations forming in Iraq. That would be a violation of your fourth amendment rights. So obviously have no regards for your first and fourth amendment rights as well as your second amendment rights. Which amendments, if any, do you hold sacred? You speak of the importance of liberty to you. To think that your liberty is safe if you allow the Constitution to be destroyed one amendment at a time is one of the most reverse and illogical ways of thinking I have ever heard. To the person with the “grandpa” comment. You’re darn straight! I’m a very proud grandpa and I’m also a veteran and a taxpayer. What makes you think that the younger generation of this country have a right to trample on the rights of their elders? Being older does not mean that all of our generation is “over the hill” by any stretch of the imagination. Most of us are not the dumb bunnies you’d like to portray us as either.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :