Quantcast

Comments about ‘Jay Evensen: Newtown, Aurora and other mass murders defy quick solutions’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Jan. 10 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "If we allow these killers to divide us along mindless ideological lines, we will have misunderstood the question, and our solutions will not be answers."

Whaaaa . . . ?

So, you're saying we should do nothing. Talk, maybe. Hold hearings. Grandstand. But do nothing, since it might show we're divided?

And the killers? Do you honestly thinks they'll be deterred by all this "unity?"

C'mon!

There is a simple, readily available action that can be, and is being, implemented today to make kids safer -- training and arming willing school personnel.

That's what can and should be done, NOW.

Then, after our kids are safe, if liberals want to blather, pontificate, bloviate, and advocate some brave, new, untried touchy-feely hokum -- fine. Let 'em.

At least the kids will be safe in the meantime.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

Because there exist people who misuse guns does not mean that law abiding people should have give up their constitutional rights to have guns.

Congress most likely will not go along with further restrictions, and anything the president does by executive order can and should and will be undone by the next president if we vote right.

I hate to put Obamacare at risk to protect guns, but I am prepared to vote to do it.

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

A simple question. What is the probability that any given teacher who is armed will have to draw that weapon and defend themselves and their students lives any time during their teaching career? Versus the probability that the weapon carried by the teacher will be mishandled and do personal damage. Versus the probablity that the weapon carried by the teacher will be stolen and either do damage or fall into the wrong hands. Versus the probablity that if such a horrific situation would occur and the teacher drew their weapon with lethal intent against an ansailant clothed in body armor and firing a semi-automatic weapon they wouldn't unintentionaly kill students themselves in the chaos and terror.

What does experience tell us?

The Sensible Middle
Bountiful, UT

re pragmatistferlife

A simple question. What is the probability that any given teacher who is armed will have to draw that weapon and defend themselves and their students lives any time during their teaching career?

----

We trust police to carry guns and for the most part this has been a success. Teachers are professionals, and for those who choose to carry, I would expect no less of them.

KJB1
Eugene, OR

Quick, blame Quentin Tarantino!

And no rational person is going to say that gun control will prevent every gun-related death, but we can clearly do better than we have been. Based on this logic, we might as well legalize drunk driving. People are going to do it anyway, right?

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

The Sensible Middle,

Agreed that teachers are professionals and that some (my father and many others of the WWII generation) would have had the necessary firearms background to be effective and safe. In today’s world, many (not all, but many) of the teachers I know are not firearms folks. If they had wanted to be police, they would have chosen that profession instead. And, police get a lot of firearms and other training for emergency situations (logically). Teachers will get far less because their training needs to focus on teaching.

KJB1,

Yes, blame Quentin Tarantino and Hollywood in general for fully embracing violence as an art form while howling against the reality and assuming that the one has nothing to do with the other. Do I say that the art creates the reality? No, but it is often its muse.

one old man
Ogden, UT

We are told that James Holmes spent months buying (legally) an arsenal of weapons and thousands of rounds of ammo.

There were people who say now that they had concerns about Holmes' mental state but didn't know where they could report them.

People are not prohibited from packing guns legally until they have been convicted of a felony. But in many cases in which guns have been used in domestic violence, the shooter had a very long record of misdemeanors. The majority of gang bangers have not been convicted of a felony, but do have long misdemeanor records. They can pack legally.

Would a better solution be to change laws to include violent misdemeanors as a cause to remove the privilege of packing a gun?

Would a national data base tracking system that would record purchases of weapons and ammo be a way tip us off that someone is imitating Holmes in buying up an arsenal?

Would setting up a way for people to easily report someone who seems to be mentally imbalanced help?

There ARE sensible ways to solve this without confiscation of guns. We just need to find them.

Mukkake
Salt Lake City, UT

one old man:
[Would setting up a way for people to easily report someone who seems to be mentally imbalanced help?]

Oh yeah, that's not gonna be abused. Worst suggestion so far.

Craig Clark
Boulder, CO

As Jay Everson aptly put it, "talking points are replacing rational thought and debate."

I find myself as well being caught up in it.

Before the 2012 spate of mass shootings commenced, the story the country’s attention was fixed on was the case of Trayvon Martin who was killed in a confrontation with a conscientious citizen on the lookout to safeguard his own community. George Zimmerman was undoubtedly confident in his ability with guns and his own good judgment. That may explain why he disregarded a police dispatch discouraging him from going in to deal with a situation for which he was not a trained professional. That case now seems irrelevant in the heat of recent calls to quick-fix the mass shooting problem by arming school teachers whose job is to teach. How stupid can one get?

I don’t have the answers but I do agree that the solution is not as simple as both sides of the gun debate are trying to make it. But I’m glad we’re talking about it. Now let’s see if we can listen as well as we talk.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Guns are being abused now, Muk. Do you have a better suggestion? If you do, let's hear it. But criticizing without offering a better alternative is useless.

Joan Watson
TWIN FALLS, ID

The fault lies in the deranged and insane mind of a mass murderer. There is no guarantee that schools will be immune from such persons no matter how many restrictions are placed on gun ownership. In this day and age, every school should have an armed security officer.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Excellent comment, Craig. Thank you for using some good sense.

Mukkake
Salt Lake City, UT

[Guns are being abused now, Muk. Do you have a better suggestion? If you do, let's hear it. But criticizing without offering a better alternative is useless.]

Brainstorming is fun, but when somebody suggests a terrible idea you don't need to offer another idea to be able to shoot it down.

Anti Bush-Obama
Washington, DC

Nobody likes to talk about what kinds of psychotropic drugs these killers were on when they committed these crimes. I think the drugs are the main problem.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

from the article:
"Were they mentally ill? Perhaps, but some scholarly studies show mental illness is rarely a factor in homicide, and that substance abuse may be a bigger danger."

=========

Yes - there was a substance present, but it wasn't anything illegal.

Mall shooters,
School shooters,
Geneology Library shooters,
Jordan River Temple shooters,
Trolley Square shooters,
Mothers drowning their own children,
Teachers have sex with students,
Women trying to drive over their estranged husbands,
going Postal,

all unexplicable.
all under a Doctor's care, and
all being perscribed the same meds.

It's the only common denominator.

----------

@Anti Bush-Obama
Washington, DC

Agreed!

one old man
Ogden, UT

The "main problem?" Or only one of many in a very complicated mess?

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

Sensible Middle..you misssed the whole point of the question. It wasn't what's the probablity of a teacher needing to defend themselves and their students..it was that probablity compared to the other probablities, and Craig Clark explained the consequenses of the other probablities quite nicely.

This is a very complicated and confiluted problem compounded by the fact that you can't end violence, just mitigate it or it's consequences. Therefore it is a problem of probablities, and life should have taught you all ready that the probablity of negative consequences flowing from gun toting teachers is far greater than the probability that a teacher will ever have to use a concealed weapon in their classroom.

dalefarr
South Jordan, Utah

I dunno. Your newspaper says it's Tarentino's fault.

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

So what do we do? Columbine did not happen yesterday. We still do not have any solutions, but we have NOT tried anything and things have just continued to get worse.

Someone wrote that an automatic rifle would actually have been a much better means to kill but none of these killers chose to use them. Why? Maybe because we banned them? It is something to think about. Gangsters in the thirties used machine guns to commit their crimes, but today, no one does. Again, ask yourself why.

We need solutions - we have had time to ponder these things already. Give us some solutions that we can at least try!

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "Give us some solutions that we can at least try!"

We've done so, here in Utah. Training and arming willing teachers and staff. And, it's working, so far. Let's give it a chance before we start ripping the Constitution to shreds.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments