Utah is right to step back and wait and see. They have done nothing so far for
the mentaly inpared and there has been no out cry for the ones that the police
has killed. Ya remember the one in suthern Utahh or the one that was arrested
and put back on the street with know idea where he was or how to get home along
with night blindness? Or a few others around the state. Where is your out rage
about them and why were you not fighting for it the? Now some one talks gun
control and every one get's excited and wants more mental heath care why is
Are Utah representatives are important parts to our do nothing Congress. The
worst Congress in the history of our nation, made up of useless representatives.
Why do we pay this people?
In the meantime, our children must also take a wait-and-see approach to see if
they are really the concern of politicians or if they are once again, an
acceptable loss for those who are adamant about the ability to pack around
assault rifles that have one intended purpose---killing lots of people.
Let's wait until the next election...Then will see what we need to do
to get re-elected.
Hilarious!So instead of Chaffetz and Lee coming up with their own
solutions they're waiting and seeing? Sitting on the sidelines to wait and
criticize the starting quarterback?!Ridiculous!Momma
always told me you have no room to criticize when you don't even make
suggestions.When will Utahns wake up?
I agree with the "wait and see" position. After hearing what the
President said about investigating all avenues (even some bad ideas), I can see
this committee wants to do what is right (maybe for once). I really think if
Congress tried to do away with the 2nd Amendment, there would be a riot on
Washington and heads would roll. Gun control is not the answer, and I am more
inclined to agree with an application and background check on people buying
guns. But then you have to add in mental illness. Here is a bigger issue into
the mix. There was an old bumper sticker that said: "When guns are
outlawed, only outlaws will have guns". Outlaws (criminals, gangs, etc.)
will always find a way to get a weapon from stealing it or illegally. So we
have a very fine line here, one constitutional right and the other of outlawing
guns totally. Yet if you did that, for those who are hunters, game would grow
out of proportion. To many variables, and not one clear answer.
A recent cartoon by Val Bagley in the Tribune hit this right on the head. Look
it up. It was priceless. And, unfortunately, completely accurate.
We don't need to have more gun restrictions on normal people with normal
guns. The mental health protections should not give those people access and use
of weapons for the wrong cause. Weapons helped us as a nation gain freedoms and
keeps some of the criminal environment from attacking any house because they
don't know who have weapons or not.The attacker in this situation
knew that schools and teachers didn't have guns at the school. He had a
free hand to do whatever he wanted. He had plenty of weapons and ammunition to
take out everyone.Violent video games for non-mentally gamers is one
thing. However, if a person doesn't have all their faculties, then the
definition of violent could be horrendous violent.Rights of some
affect the rights the majority have.This Principal died defending
her children and employees. She is a model for all.
What a sad week for this town and school.However, they had a very up
to date emergency plan for their school with very good procedures, which saved a
lot of children and teachers. It did even help with prevention of more trauma to
the minds and souls of all those involved.Principals have to deal
with people with mental issues, everyday. These people are students, parents,
and others that may come or be at the school. However, this was a person, who
supposedly had access and used on a regular basis with his mother high powered
rifles and guns are shooting ranges.It is one thing to have people
register their weapons but if a parent chooses to take a child or an adult
without full mental capabilities, that is a problem. The principal
could have had everything right in her school but a non-student arrives with
plans to take down little defenseless children and their teachers is a planned
event. The school procedures saved many but those teachers and staff died trying
to save all students.
Wait and see. Provide no leadership at all. Tremble before gun advocates. Let
innocent people die. Sit back and let children be massacred again rather than
do the right thing.
Utahan's in Congress take their orders from the NRA. They have chosen to
hunker down until they feel they can emerge to further the interests of the gun
industry. They will accept the murder of children as the price to be paid to
keep assault weapons and flesh-destroying bullets available to anyone who wants
them.They really don't care. Somehow they think that killing
children is acceptable as long as someone can have access to a assault rifle (or
other weapon with the capacity of massive killing power) just in case someone
else decides they want to invade a school or public place and start shooting.In fact, they argue that everyone should have a gun. They believe that
a world with guns is somehow safer because everyone can then shoot at each other
whenever a gunfight breaks out. Such Wild West imagry dominates their thinking
as something exciting and ideal.And then there is the ultimate claim
that people need these weapons to fight "the government" sometime in the
future . . . sheer insanity!
So Chaffetz and Company can't come up with their own simple solutions? As a
layperson, may I suggest restrictions on military-style semi-automatic weapons,
"cop-killer" bullets, high-capacity magazines, and loose background
checks at gun shows? I'll be happy to continue to brainstorm on behalf of
the esteemed congressmen if they continue to be short on ideas.
@bandersen -- People can pray and we can still ban assault weapons. Both are
possible together. I didn't know God wanted us to have assault weapons, so
I didn't know the two things were mutually exclusive. And I can also tell
you that if my child were shot 10 or 11 times by a semi-automatic assault rifle,
the first thing I would want to do would be to ban them. My guess is that the
law abiding citizens in that community might feel the same way. So might you if
it were your child that was killed.
Been there, done that. Maybe let's try a 'don't wait'
let's DO' approach. Waiting to see if this was the last of these
incidents is insanity.
It is a sorry state of affairs when a nation that has rejected God in the
classroom now seeks to stop more carnage without his aid! Every person on bended
knee would do more good than a host of bureacratic red tape depriving law
abiding citizens from doing more of what everyone wants--a safe place for
children. I'm absolutely certain that for all of the law abiding citizens
in the community where this tragedy occurred, the first notion was not 'we
need more gun control', but a deep sense of soberness and reflection on the
timeless values of kindness, respect, family life, and dependence on God.
Re: "It's a matter of math."Yeah -- but, in liberal
"new math," they don't even count the murder, robbery, rape, and
mayhem that is prevented or deterred every year by people with guns.Knowledgeable estimates come in somewhere around 200,000. Plus.So,
liberals suggest we sacrifice 200,000+ Americans per year on the gun-control
altar, in return for a pig-in-a-poke security scheme based on the unsupported
notion that, "in the long run there would be less guns, period," that
they believe might result in some reduction in suicide rates.Hmmmmmmm.And, by the way, that "long run" would be long,
indeed, given that there are nearly as many guns out there today as there are
Americans, a goodly number in the hands of people -- on both sides of the law --
that are extremely resistant to giving them up.Liberal math! No
wonder they're so confused.
It's a matter of math. Over 36000 a year die from guns wounds. 18000 of
those deaths are suicides. If guns were harder to get, deaths from guns would be
much lower. So to say criminals would still have guns may be true in the short
run but in the long run there would be less guns, period. Hence, there would be
less death by guns. I doubt there would be 36000 homicides or even suicides by
knife, it would just take to much energy.
Happy Valley Heretic,what has your comment got to do with gun control?
But then, you posted that 49.2% and 43.7% constitute majorities, so we know you
have no credibility
The issue is supposedly "reducing violence against innocent kids in schools
from crazy people with guns."However, the lilberals' only
solution is more gun control, which has been proven to fail at reducing crime.
In reality, this is an opportunistic attempt to pass an item that has been on
the agenda for many years- banning as many guns as they can from as many people
as possible. (And figure out ways to get the rest of them later.)Real solutions will include looking at arming teachers, locking up mentally
ill, making civil commitment easier, and better mental health treatment, and
reducing the privacy protections that prevent proper handling of the mentally
ill.The Utah delegation is on the right page, but many in Washington
are, as usual, off pursuing an agenda that increases their power not help the
country or protect our cherished freedom.
Former comments are right on when saying nobody should use this latest tragedy
to discuss gun-control laws (or lack of). Actually, this should have happened
many many years ago. When the second amendment was ratified I honestly
don't think our forefathers thought for a minute that semi-automatic
assault rifles would be in the hands of anyone besides military or police. Why
do we all tip-toe around this issue? Is the NRA really that powerful? The
constitution needs to be amended (as it has many many times since it was
written) to careful consider gun violence. The comment 'get the mentally
ill off the streets and into treatment' astounds me. I work in mental
health and trust me when I say, What treatment and where? Unfortunately, a
crime must usually be committed before a person can be 'locked-up' and
off the streets and treatment is still non-existent. What must it take for
Americans to step up and say "NO MORE senseless gun violence'?
Re: "'I hope they are successful in coming up with solutions . . .
rather than using it to pursue an anti-gun agenda . . . ,' Sen. Mike Lee
said."Yeah, and there are those out there that hope to see a
unicorn in the flesh, too.Democrats have already tipped their hand.
The only measures they're discussing are their anti-gun "holy
trinity" -- ban "assault weapons" [which would undoubtedly be
defined to include most guns], "high" [meaning normal] capacity
magazines, and any sale at a gun show.We're as likely to see
real solutions from liberals as we are to see unicorns.
Cigarettes, Alcohol, drunk driving, child abuse, illegal drugs.... these all
kill thousands of people, and hundreds of children every year in America. The
focus should be on those things, far before gun control. A few small incidents
should not create a nationwide ban on firearms.
I can believe the wait-and-see part. What troubles me is that the waiting and
seeing is over who's going to be the next incumbent to get a nasty primary
challenge from their own right based on a vote or two opposing assault weapons.
Don't want to be the next Bennett? Be veerrry careful.
As usual, the Democrats are blind and ignorant when it comes to the fact that
first we need to implement new programs for the mentally ill, etc. Get them into
treatment and off the streets and it will solve many of our problems. I believe
we would not have that terrible tragedy in Connecticut if that boy had been in
treatment. His Mother was in the process of arranging for that and that is why
she shot her. He is a menace to society. Let's focus on what is the most
important issue here - progressive mental health for those who are in need.
In the wake of the Newtown catastrophe, I hope that Rep. Chaffetz and other
members of the Utah congressional delegation will not just call for the nation
to address mental health issues only as a way of avoiding or distracting us from
addressing gun control issues. With the possible exception of Rep. Matheson, I
have heard very little from our other representatives and senators from Utah
that gives me confidence that they will suddenly be willing to increase federal
funding for mental health care and disability services. Money isn't the
only solution, but it is essential to finding solutions. I hope I'm wrong,
and that they are all willing to do something significant and meaningful for
mental health and disability health care. I also hope I'm wrong about my
expectation that they will resist sensible gun control measures
OK, two things. First, we know liberals already wanted to circumscribe 2nd
Amendment rights, and it's pretty cynical of them to use a tragedy like
this to advance their agenda. Second, any new laws won't do any good,
because the relevant group of people won't obey them.
Gun legislation is not the answer. You cannot legislate crazy. He could have
driven his car through the playground during recess just as easy.The only reason
that gun legislation is brought up is because people are unwilling to blame
themselves for allowing our society to not confront and treat mental illness .
We have too many strict HIPPA laws and do not give social workers and law
enforcement agencies the ability to intervene when the obviously see something
Utahns in Congress have been waiting for Mit to win the presidency, since that
didn't happen they will wait another 4 years before doing anything.