Values of productive life

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Karen R. Houston, TX
    June 2, 2014 10:01 p.m.

    @ Badgerbadger

    "To use Kent's words, if you think taking away all the guns is the solution, you're hallucinating."

    But I'm betting if you take all the guns away there will be a lot fewer gun-related deaths.

    In this country, we indulge males' predilection for violence rather than discourage it for one reason: $$$. So why don't we use these industries' profit streams as a financial source to strengthen our mental health system and provide more effective and proactive services to the mentally unstable. We can call it the Testosterone Tax.

  • Confused Sandy, UT
    June 2, 2014 4:14 p.m.

    I for one would like to see the demographics of the "Reduced" violent crime rate.

    Is this trend overall or what?

    Do they separate out the death by age group?

    To me, the over all crime rate has been reduced, but I think there is an increase among the teen and early 20's age group (no documentation to back this up).

    Hollywood and Video games are partly to blame for this increase, in my mind... the other part is PARENTS not doing their due diligence in monitoring what and how long these things are done.

    We have become so PC in our world, that even Teenagers threaten to call the cops if a parents disciplines them....

    Then when something like this happens... who is to blame? the weapon of choice of course, not the parents/system/hollywood...

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    June 2, 2014 4:05 p.m.

    There will always be people who will trade liberty for security, but, did they take the time to check to see if any "laws" had been broken? Elliot Roger stabbed three people to death before shooting anyone. Is "stabbing" people to death against the law? Why didn't that "law" stop Elliot Roger. Elliot Roger hit four people with his car. Is "hitting" people with a car against the law? Why didn't that "law" stop Elliot Roger?

    Elliot Roger's father is a photographer who specializes in taking pictures of women's naked "backsides". Elliot Roger claimed that he was spurned by women who didn't want to have sex with him. Did the fact that no one is "required" to have sex stop Elliot Roger from killing people?

    Elliot Roger used his BMW as a battering ram to run over people. Did Elliot Roger break any laws about killing people with his BMW? Should BMWs be banned because they can be use to kill people?

    Elliot Roger was in theraphy. Is it possible that Elliot Roger was not mentally stable?

    Who killed those people, Elliot Rogers, the BMW, the knife, the gun? I say it was Elliot Roger.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 2, 2014 3:32 p.m.

    Re: "Face it, if the military wanted to take over, there is nothing you or I could do to stop it"...

    2nd amendment wasn't intended to prevent military taking over. Though that's one thing it would help to prevent.

    Think about it... how many people in the US Army? (539,675)

    How many PEOPLE in the USA (313.9 million in 2012)

    So... 1/2 Million vs 314 Million... who would even try it???


    IMO 2nd Amendment was designed more to keep other nations from invading. Remember... Japan decided AGAINST invading the US mainland, because as one General said, "there would be an armed citizen behind every blade of grass".

    It's also designed to discourage any overly-ambitious government bureaucrat from trying to take over government control by force, or abuse the population.


    Mostly... it wasn't intended to WIN... It was intended to keep ANY of these government takeovers from even being considered...

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    June 2, 2014 2:49 p.m.

    We can dance around and blame hollywood and mental illness and liberals and who knows what all but we can't pretend we can leave gun control off the table. As one post earlier noted, even 'the Onion' can see it. Developed nations all over the world have armed citizens. And liberals, and hollywood violence and the mentally ill. But they don't have the mass shootings nor even but a few of the 'day to day' type shootings we experience here. Gun control isn't the only tool in the box. But it's one that should never be left out of the box.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    June 2, 2014 2:43 p.m.

    "And the people he knifed to death? How does a gun law change that?"

    You could probably go one step further since I'm not sure any of the recently proposed gun laws would prevent the gun deaths in that attack. Fact is "not one more" just isn't possible. However, we have over 10,000 murders from guns each year. We can't get rid of them all, but we should be able to do better than our near worst in the industrialized world rates (Russia, Brazil, and Mexico are the exceptions and I'm not sure the latter two necessarily are considered first world nations).

    "Even without knives or guns, this guy could still rape, strangle, club to death, hit people with a car, any number of violent acts. Choosing his method is so inferior to prevention through addressing the cause."

    I see no reason why we can't address multiple things.

  • Ford DeTreese Provo, UT
    June 2, 2014 2:00 p.m.

    We are the most heavily armed of the first world nations. But even our oversupply of guns is incapable of stopping the mass shootings. What's the answer? The Right seems to think even more guns is the answer. But facts are facts, and if you have a gun in your house, you or one of your loved ones is more likely to be killed or injured by it than that it will be used to prevent any sort of crime. Guns aren't the answer. They are a big part of the problem. Just because the NRA has bullied almost all our politicians into submission doesn't mean it's right.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    June 2, 2014 1:00 p.m.

    Actually, the rate of violent crime in the USA is now half what it was in 1980. Violence is decreasing, not increasing. The alarmists are wrong. The Elliott Rodgers and Adam Lanzas of the world are mentally disturbed people who needed professional help. Somehow we've got to help the few who are prone to violent outbursts. That's a hard problem to solve.

  • Darrel Eagle Mountain, UT
    June 2, 2014 12:31 p.m.


    Face it, if the military wanted to take over, there is nothing you or I could do to stop it. Simple fact. So using arms as a protection from government overreach is doesn't work.

    The constitution provides entirely legal ways to change the government without revolt. It's called voting. Don't like how Congress works, vote your guy out (I know, the problem is never my guy, it's always someone else, so I'll send my guy back). Want to make a change the Constitution doesn't allow for? Change it, (e.g. if you don't like the equal protection clause being used to allow same sex marriage, pass an amendment).

    It was written with the intent that we not have a standing army, but rather we would mobilize the local militias as needed. Because of that, the well-regulated militia would be allowed to maintain arms (in fact in those days, it was required to BRING your gun).

    We have had a standing military since WWII, defense spending shows no sign of slowing down. Our attitude of the second amendment needs changing too. Or should we disband the military as the Framers intended?

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    June 2, 2014 10:52 a.m.

    Kent and Schnee

    And the people he knifed to death? How does a gun law change that? Are the ones killed by bullets the only ones you care about? The people who were stabbed are just as dead.

    Even without knives or guns, this guy could still rape, strangle, club to death, hit people with a car, any number of violent acts. Choosing his method is so inferior to prevention through addressing the cause.

    To use Kent's words, if you think taking away all the guns is the solution, you're hallucinating.

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    June 2, 2014 10:51 a.m.

    LaRue, you will be shocked every time this happens because it will happen over and over until we start dealing with it like adults. Cute little aphorisms' like "guns don't kill people do" is nothing more than a code for let's do nothing to stop the insanity. I know no single act will suffice but what if a simple expanded background check had prevented this latest from acquiring a weapon and dealing with mental health issues as part a quality healthcare system, who knows what could have been prevented. Blame it on Hollywood or Silicon Valley if it makes you feel better but I personally blame all of us. "Not one more"!

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    June 2, 2014 10:37 a.m.

    @John Charity Spring. I find it interesting you blame Hollywood and the entertainment industry. I am sure you would not blame guns for killing people, because people kill people, right?

    How does Hollywood kill people then? It is the same principle the right uses in their argument over gun control.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 2, 2014 10:35 a.m.

    The murder rate has actually fallen by 50% from its high in 1990. We are becoming a much less violent society, but we have seen a huge uptick in mass shootings. This seems completely contradictory. I don't know the reason, and I don't think anyone else does either.

  • Demosthenes Rexburg, ID
    June 2, 2014 10:33 a.m.

    If I may paraphrase what the second amendment is intended to say: The nation needs a military, but the right of citizens to bear arms shall not be infringed.

    The second amendment was intended to protect the citizens from their government. That's the whole theme of the Constitution -- restricting the power of the federal government while protecting the rights of states and citizens.

  • Thinkin\' Man Rexburg, ID
    June 2, 2014 10:27 a.m.

    John Dillinger and Bonnie & Clyde were a long time before television and video games. You cannot blame the violence acts committed by individuals on easy scapegoats like TV and games. Some people just become violent, and we have to deal directly with that.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    June 2, 2014 10:27 a.m.

    "This is the most correct letter to appear in this paper in a long time. Our society is becoming more and more violent at a rate never before seen."

    Violence rates have declined the past couple decades. Mass shootings are one of the few things to increase but they make up a small portion of gun violence. And the world is having it's lowest rates of violence in human history. So your argument is based on a completely incorrect premise.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    June 2, 2014 9:42 a.m.

    A headline in the Onion recently was spot-on: "'No Way To Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens." Yes, most other countries have figured this out; and it has nothing to do with how violent our society has become (which I don't buy). It has everything to do with lax gun laws. It's more a function of availability than anything else, given the fact that we are unique in the world in our infatuation with weapons that have no other purpose than to kill people.

    So take your pick. We can either start interpreting the Second Amendment as it was written and start restricting gun ownership, except for those who are part of a well-regulated militia, or we can keep on having mass killings on an accelerating basis. And if you think there's really another option, you're hallucinating.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    June 2, 2014 9:00 a.m.

    Oh, and did I mention entitlement mentality? This guy felt entitled, another serious flaw in our current social thinking.

    One person is never entitled to another person's goods (in this case, body) or services (in this case sex). But for this knifer, society taught him that he was entitled to what others had and when the wouldn't roll and give it to him, he killed them.

    The gun and the knives would have killed no one, without the sexual fire and entitlement mentality that liberals have fueled in our society over the last 50+ years.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    June 2, 2014 8:14 a.m.

    It is not just the violent behavior is a problem. I found it most alarming that the recent shooter was killing people because he felt entitled to sex with women who weren't giving it to him. The constant distortion of sex's place in our lives really played out in this case, as it has in so many public forum issues.

    But don't you dare say something about God or values is public. God and values are expected to stay in the closet, but sex has become totally public.

  • John Charity Spring Back Home in Davis County, UT
    June 2, 2014 7:37 a.m.

    This is the most correct letter to appear in this paper in a long time. Our society is becoming more and more violent at a rate never before seen.

    The irrefutable fact is that Hollywood and the rest of the modern entertainment industry are largely to blame for this epidemic of violence. Study after study has found a link between the consumption of violent entertainment and violent behavior. This is irrefutable fact.

    Unfortunately, this violent entertainment is reinforced by left-wing entitlement policies which cause young men to focus on entertainment instead of working. Their greatest ambition in life is to live in their parents' basements. No wonder that Western Civilization has reached its nadir.