Comments about ‘Connecticut school shooting stirs debate about competing liberties, gun violence’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Dec. 16 2012 6:00 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
DN Subscriber 2
SLC, UT

We already have plenty of gun control at every level. And, it never works.

What we need is some "nut control" to get the dangerously mentally ill folks off the streets. Will that infringe on their rights? Probably, but if you are going to go around trampling on individual rights, why stop with guns, or mental health, speech, or religion, or ...

The Chicago Way advocates "Never let a crisis go to waste" and at a time when we are bankrupt, spending way beyond our means, approaching the "fiscal cliff," about to hit the debt limit (again!), having Iran closer to a nuclear weapon every day, a highly emotional issue like this horrendous crime is perfect for diverting the attention of most Americans away from the vital issues that President Obama has not addressed in his first four years.

As serious as 27 dead in a school is, those other issues hold far more serious long term consequences for our nation.

Meanwhile, Utah needs to aggressively pursue training of more of our teachers to legally carry self defense guns so they can protect their students, and knowing they are armed will also deter many criminals and crazies from doing anything.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "Permitholders can carry concealed firearms into Utah public schools. Connecticut does not allow the practice."

Thus, in Connecticut, the law guarantees evil/deranged killers an inexhaustible source of innocent, defenseless victims.

The "conversation" feckless liberal deniers should be demanding should center around why we don't permit willing teachers and school staff to be trained and to carry the tools necessary to protect themselves and their charges.

Unfortunately, single-trick liberal ponies can only return to what they know -- strengthening the guarantee, and enlarging the pool of defenseless victims.

Janet
Ontario, OR

There is zero need for the public to have access to assault weapons. Period. There is a strong argument to be made for the rights of citizens to defend themselves with handguns, but those rights come with risk and responsibility. Emotion seems to rule the discussion on both (all?) sides. What's needed is careful analysis and decision-making by people who care more about balancing safety and security.

dwayne
Provo, UT

DN Subscriber 2,

Inevitably there are those who willingly turn defense of themselves and our country over to others and seek to wash their hands of any and all responsibility in the matter of self-defense or defense of the U.S. but that's their choice but it doesn't mean we need to be so lightly armed that it's laughable to even suggest that we could defend ourselves from a common street thug let alone any foreign or domestic military style force. The reason no one messes with the U.S. has nothing to do with us having a military since an organized military can be defeated. It has to do with the entire people being armed.

There is a saying that is attributed to the head of the Japanese military in WWII. It is "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

Remember what happened during the war of 1812? The British were totally shocked to find out that even conquering the Capital of the U.S. and burning the President's home would NEVER result in the defeat of a free people who are fully armed.

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

it's too bad there can't be better gun laws but the left wing crazies want only one thing - NO GUNS PERIOD. How do you have a discussion with these types? Of course there should be back ground checks at gun shows but the NRA well knows if it gives and inch the left will go for a mile immediately so that is why we can't have a sensible discussion. Let's face it - the left will say if there were no guns there would be no gun deaths but they won't say if there were no alcohol there would be no alcohol related deaths. Both are bogus. Chicago violent crime has gone way up since the no-guns policy was instituted. Liberal policy just never works.

owlmaster2
Kaysville, UT

@DN Subscriber2
Obama's first 4 years would have been even more successful than they were had he had some cooperation from the party of NO. Even the writers of the Constitution compromised. Compromise is what our Nation was built on. Lack of compromise is destroying our Nation. Just saying.

We definitely need to ban clips that hold more than 9 rounds. There isn't a hunter in the world that needs a clip of 30 rounds. It's insane to manufacture clips of that size for the general public.

dwayne
Provo, UT

owlmaster2,

Your assumption is that the purpose for owning a gun is hunting.

"It's insane to manufacture clips of that size for the general public."

We are not the general public. We are the government of the United States of America. We come to that role as equals and we leave it as equals. The militia is the entire body of the people. Our founding fathers did not establish a government that was above the individual. The military is us, organized or unorganized

What good will our government be if D.C. is nuked, the President is dead and there are foreign soldiers marching on our state capitols and the military is in complete shambles? What will you do with those 9 rounds of ammunition you have in your gun? There's a reason Switzerland has gone uninvaded even during WWII. Quoting from a 1938 news article "The Swiss still remain embedded in their desire for democracy, however, and it has been written with authority that the keynote of their patriotism is defence. Its area is 15,950 square miles - and there is no egress to the sea. The frontiers are armed, and an invader would find his way barred."

dwayne
Provo, UT

Janet,

"There is zero need for the public to have access to assault weapons. Period."

Quoting from a 1938 news article (I quoted it in another post as well), "Militarily, Switzerland is one of the most interesting countries in the world. Since 1914 strategists have canvassed the possibility of Germany's attacking France through Swiss territory. To prevent this, the Swiss have reorganized and re-equipped their army. They can, with their 4,000,000 population put an army of 240,000 men in the field within three days."

What has set countries like Switzerland and the United States apart has been the fact that our citizens have been heavily armed for the times they have lived in so it would have been foolhardy to do anything like invading us. You claim there's no reason for citizens (the government) to have assault weapons but there is.

We have a duty to protect and defend our country and as the militia, organized and unorganized, is the military.

If a foreign army can have assault rifles our militia can too (us).

Do you think a 2 million active duty and reserve military can defend every city and street in America?

My2Cents
Taylorsville, UT

There is no decision to make, the law is written and legal and constitutions, we can have hold and carry guns without any infringements or controls, period.

Its a national epidemic that children are killing children, and this 20 year old is still a child in mind and spirit that hadn't learned the meaning of life. Bombs are less plentiful or they would be weapon of choice for any child with a grudge against educational prisons.

A gun has no concept of killing these 20 souls in this attack? Guns just tagged along for the ride. There is nothing for the supreme court to decide, our inalienable rights are not negotiable laws. They are the law that not even a dictator can invalidate or take from us.

Its time to evaluate and ask the children why they hate schools and what they represent so profoundly they will give their life to destroy them? Guns can't talk, children can and its time for one brave news man or senator or governor to ask the children this question. If anyone really cares about why, its the living children they need to study and question, not the dead sacrificial lambs.

On the other hand
Riverdale, MD

@dwayne, do you think a foreign army can simultaneously attack every city and street in America?

3grandslams
Iowa City, IA

Lets have this discussion about gun control ( which is really a general term for gun ban). But if we are serious about banning things that kill the innocent, let's ban everthing which kill the innocent. Let me start with suggesting alcohol. Yes that's right, more people die each year at the hands of drunks or with the ritual of drinking, than are killed with guns... and it's not even close.

I'll support gun bans when we also ban alcohol from all college campuses and until a person reaches 30, then they need to take "drinking" classes and learn about all the laws and dangers of consumption, then apply for a permit to drink and pay a large fee for a license to drink. The license expires in 5 years and they need to repeat the course. And their license may or may not be recognized in all 50 states.

We need to remember the second admendment wasn't created for hunters, it was written down to protect citizens from their own government.

eastcoastcoug
Danbury, CT

This is a systemic and cultural problem coming from violence as entertainment, the breakup of traditional families and communities, the rise of mental illness, etc.

We have an arms race out here, and in the hands of a mentally ill young man (which most of these shooters are), it becomes a bloodbath. Arming teachers or shoppers is not the answer. It's bad enough thinking of one shooter in a room or store, let alone 10 or 12. Ever heard of friendly fire??

I'm sick to death of the gun lobby and it's blanket protection of weapons and ammunition of all kinds. You are a minority and I pray the majority of us with more sense will eventually hold sway in this country.

The Dixie Kid
Saint George, UT

There are 75,000 alcohol related deaths per year in the US. But nobody talks about banning alcohol.

TOO
Sanpete, UT

Yes, let's ban guns. You know since it's obvious that if guns are banned, then there is no way that anything like a shooting will ever take place again. I'm pretty sure all the shooters lately thought that killing was legal--otherwise they wouldn't have done it.
Criminals will always find ways to break he law. Ban guns of every kind and you will see it will make no difference. In fact, it will make murder go up because people will murder to get to the guns. People who are desperate to commit a crime will stop at nothing.
Blaming guns for these shooters is absurd. It's like blaming cars for drunk drivers. Are we going to start talking about auto control next to decrease the rate of DUIs? Get real people.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"it's too bad there can't be better gun laws but the left wing crazies want only one thing - NO GUNS PERIOD. "

I have little doubt that this is a correct statement. We can always find "crazies" in any group.

But, the "left wing crazies" dont run the show.

I would venture to say that no a single "liberal" on this board would support a "no guns period" stance.

And, unlike the right, the crazies on the left dont run the show.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

Gun control is like the war on drugs. It won't work it hasn't worked. Especially in America.

It is frequently said the solution to bad speech is not to restrict the right to free speech, but it is more speech (to set the record straignt). In otherwords we let Nazis and the Klan say what they want, with the hope and expectation that others will set the record straight.

The same is true with guns. We now have armed policemen in most schools. It is somewhat likely the policeman would be able defend against a school invasion. However we have not yet allowed principals or teachers to qualify to carry a gun for the protection of themselves and the school children. Perhaps its time we do this.

Fitness Freak
Salt Lake City, UT

While we are discussing gun control why not mention (although the mainstream media won't allow it)violence on T.V. and in movies?

What about violent video games?

How many kids do we know who have let computers, (and their misuse)totally take over 10-12 hrs of their day?

WHY NOT have computers set at the factory to shut off after more than 1 hr. per day of violent video game use?

The reasons for mental illness are many. Sadly, the state-run media will accept no blame whatsoever for THEIR part in the resulting psychoses that afflict some individuals.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

Look people. This is a complex problem and solutions will not be easy.

There are always lots of breakdowns in a situation like this but the extremes (ban all guns vs do nothing) are NOT the answer.

Lets look at what was at play here.

Gun enthusiast mom
Mentally unstable son (this was known)
semi-automatic weapon
Large capacity fire power

How about locking up guns in a gun safe? Is that an unreasonable step to take? Or a trigger lock. How about gun owners take a bit of ownership of the problem and recognize their responsibilities concerning gun ownership.

We hear about the anti guns crazies with their NO GUN stance. (minority)

Well, how about the Pro Gun people. What is your solution? What would you accept? What does the NRA believe would help. What would they promote/accept?

Make some proposals.

Is DO NOTHING a solution?

JSB
Sugar City, ID

Which will have a greater affect on school shootings: increased gun control or removal of violence in the media? Media violence produces violent people and violent people will still do violent things whether they have guns or not.

eastcoastcoug
Danbury, CT

@Dixie Kid and the rest of you "Do Nothing" people,

MADD was organized and significantly reduced the number of teenage drunk driving deaths. The culture of smoking in all public places has completely changed in my lifetime. There are many variables contributing to these shootings and clearly some do happen in countries with stricter laws (not nearly as often), but that is no excuse for doing nothing.

1- All gun owners should have a license and be registered and it should be difficult to get one. We license car drivers, and a lot of other things. Guns should licensed.

2- No assault weapons or ammunition. There is simply no reason for all of us to have access to these kinds of weapons. Don't tell me we need to arm all our citizens for an eventual invasion or takeover of the government. If you are suffering from that level of paranoia right now, you should not have weapons.

3- No concealed weapons. Period.

4- Do something finally about violence as entertainment. But we also need to strengthen the family and community. All of us doing more to reach out to neighbors and especially our youth will do more than all the above combined.

to comment

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