It is sad that the nation cannot be granted even the smallest window to grieve without politics coming to the fore. I wish I could just ignore it all, but I can’t because liberty is at stake.
What progressives and their cohorts in the media always do is try to use language to frame a given debate in their favor. They have wanted your guns for a long time and they think they can use dead children to get it.
All weekend long, the media reported on the massacre and politicians screamed about the need for gun control. As most people would love to do something to prevent something like this from ever happening again, they are receptive to such messages.
All weekend long the media has reported that Adam Lanza used a “high powered rifle” and “assault style weapon” to kill. See Below
For heaven’s sake, why would anyone need a “high powered rifle” or “assault style weapon?”
But these terms are loaded lies of unspecified definition pre-determined to sway people.
Ask them what an assault style weapon is? A semi-automatic? Most rifles sold in this country are semi-automatic, meaning one bullet per trigger pull. These are not Al Capone Tommy guns. These are the same ordinary guns that many people own responsibly.
What is “assault style? Truth is, there is no definition?
What is a high-powered rifle by the media definition?
Let’s look at some facts.
Lanza used and AR-15 semi-automatic rifle with .223 caliber ammunition. Fact.
Here is another fact. That combination of weapon and ammo is banned in several states for deer hunting purposes. Know why? They consider it too weak. It is not strong enough at distance to ensure an ethical harvest. That kind of combination of weapon and ammo is most suitable to ‘varmint’ shooting.
Of course, at close range this weapon can kill effectively as almost every other type of gun can and tragically has.
These people want to ban almost all guns and they will use dead children and lies to advance their cause. Don’t be fooled.
December 17, 2012 at 6:32 am
Yes, and let's take notice that the first murder– the one of his mother– is being reported to have been done with a .22 rifle.
December 17, 2012 at 11:19 am
I am sorry but those of us who live in countries where the ownership of weapons is restricted (I've hardly ever seen one and only ever used an air-pistol once) find the American attachment to weapons disturbing. We've never had such an event here in Ireland, never. It's nearly impossible. Gun crime is fairly rare and our police are unarmed for the most part. When a country makes it possible for the ordinary citizen to possess weapons then it makes it possible for the mentally unbalanced and the criminal to possess them too and the result will be the death of innocents. I cannot see a moral argument for the possession of weapons by the ordinary citizen.
December 17, 2012 at 3:57 pm
Brother Tom,
The U.S. is not an island like Ireland and Britain. Cocaine is illegal here in the US and it flows over our porous large borders each day as illegal immigrants also do and as guns would if we outlawed them. The result would be that lawbreakers would have guns as they broke into our houses and we would not have them. Our government will not disarm the bad guys due to unreasonable search and seizure laws de facto.
I sleep with a shotgun next to me here on the NY harbor because a guy broke in, I tracked him down on the street, choked him out, and got my things back including a lethal weapon which he would have used in the next crime. He was tough and said he'd get me with a pistol. I have the house rigged at night with motion detectors if he returns with a pistol and I have a tactical shotgun
with special shells that would kill him but not my neighbors through two walls. The last two Popes speak very much about peace but their papal guard have Sig Sauer pistols…15+ shots…and they have Heckler and Koch MP7 small machine guns.
These mass murders are more about our mental health system having no coercive powers to mandate monitoring of young males who give off very strong signals of being mentally ill. And will Americans like the expense involved.
December 17, 2012 at 11:44 am
One does not "see a moral argument", one proposes a moral argument. I'd suggest the almost complete absence of experience with firearms disqualifies one from making any comments whatsoever. And that from such a lack of experience to suppose that, therefore, there are no such arguments…one might as well say, as a public figure a couple of years passed said, "I don't have all the facts, but clearly the Cambridge police acted stupidly". Let us suppose that every teacher in the school in question had been armed. Would the outcome be the same? Half the teachers? Two of them? In the face of evil, those without the means to defend themselves or the innocent, can only flee. With the intention to fight against evil, and the means to do so,evil can be stopped. And by the way, there is no such thing as "gun crime". There is only criminal behavior. There is neither consciousness, will, nor any moral agency in inanimate objects. When a country makes it impossible for the ordinary citizen to posses weapons, then it makes it possible for the mentally unbalanced politician and criminal tyrant to treat the ordinary citizen as slaves and subjects. I cannot see but that the Irish are enslaved by their inability to defend themselves from their own government.
December 17, 2012 at 11:47 am
And by the way, I see that in Britain violence is way up. How is the disarming of ordinary citizens working out? Why haven't the criminals given up their bad behavior? Don't that know that firearms are banned in England? Whiskey, tango, foxtrot?
December 17, 2012 at 11:49 am
Kerry; well said.
I would only add that banning weapons such as guns or large knives or chainsaws or baseball (criket?)bats or anything else will not stop evil from being evil.
December 17, 2012 at 11:59 am
Ireland is known for its blood soaked history…and what about all the people who died in the last bombing?
December 17, 2012 at 12:42 pm
Br. Tom,
You misunderstand our relationship with our government. The gov't does not make it possible for us to own guns. This is a right that inherently belongs to the people upon which the gov't may not infringe.
December 17, 2012 at 2:37 pm
There is not enough money in the world that would convince me to leave my children in a building with a group of adults that cannot defend them due to a law.
December 17, 2012 at 3:31 pm
Brother Tom,
In 1970 I took a train from Belfast to Dublin. That border crossing, through tunnels of barbed wire, was most interesting, with the Northern Ireland police arresting people and removing people the train at one point, and after a very slow progress for a few hundred yards, the Irish police arresting yet more people.
I met lots of wonderful Irish folks on my brief holiday, but given de Valera's death squads and Ireland's too-cozy relationship with Nazi Germany, the Irish government does not rest on any moral high ground
December 17, 2012 at 5:38 pm
Brother Tom, you are not alone. I have long told my husband and son that the reason we will not have guns in our house is that if we did, a) they would be dead, and b) I would be in jail. The Michigan legislature just passed a gun bill, and if the governor signs it, any licensed and trained citizen in Michigan will have the right to carry a gun into a church, a daycare center, a bar, a sporting event, virtually anywhere. Anyone besides me think mixing alcohol and guns is a bad idea? It is truly a world gone mad. Jesus didn't fight back, and he teaches us to love our enemies and turn the other cheek. Somehow I can't imagine him toting a gun, for ANY reason.
December 17, 2012 at 6:13 pm
Christ did not disarm his disciples who carried swords… he told Peter not to use it on soldiers in the garden of Gethsemane but Christ knew Peter and others carried them all along ( Luke 22:38) and He never said to disarm because if you let robbers in those days assault you, you could have e.g. a badly set broken arm for life…prior to modern medicine.
The gospel passage on turning the other cheek in one version specifies the cheek as the right cheek. Scholars have noted that means the opponent has struck you with his left and usually weaker hand. They conclude that Christ was not talking about actual assault but rather about a mideastern formality something like the way 18th century aristocrats may have struck each other with a glove as an insult as one sees in the movies. The Popes are protected with top of the line Sig Sauers and Heckler and Koch firearms.
But you are correct about bars and guns.
December 17, 2012 at 7:59 pm
Bill Bannon,
I will note that we have a right to defend ourselves.
December 17, 2012 at 6:02 pm
Jesus didn't fight back, and he teaches us to love our enemies and turn the other cheek. Somehow I can't imagine him toting a gun, for ANY reason.
You have heard of the little to-do with the money changers in the temple, right?
While I can't take seriously someone that tells their child that there aren't guns in the house because she'd shoot him and follows up by pronouncing on what Jesus would or would not do, I think that He who was willing to sacrifice Himself for people who didn't deserve it wouldn't get angry at people putting themselves at risk to defend innocent lives from murderers.
Guns aren't special. They're just the updated version of a sword.
December 17, 2012 at 9:55 pm
Look at the stats. Countries with less restrictive gun policies have less crimes. Even within the USA, that applies as well to the different states (as the gun laws differ).
And the converse is true.
And Jesus did not redeem us with his blood so that we will become doormats and have muslims have their way with our daughters. Read how saints and popes promoted the Crusades or the Catechism on legitimate self-defense.
December 17, 2012 at 10:20 pm
Rick,
What do u mean "Muslims having their way with our daughters"? Just curious.
December 17, 2012 at 10:42 pm
Mysterious-
do a search in news for "Australian rape gangs."
December 17, 2012 at 11:10 pm
Rick, where would I find the stats you reference? Everything I've turned up has the US outstripping the rest of the West in gun violence, up to 20 times over.
Bill Bannon, thank you for an edifying reply!
December 18, 2012 at 12:34 am
Siobhan,
You're welcome. If you ever change your mind due to encroaching crime ( or google the Petit home invasion of Connecticut),
get a 20 gauge shotgun, home defense shells, and have everyone know where the gas lines are in the house. No point in defending yourself and being sent to the moon from a gas explosion. The 20 kills and slows down best when it meets walls with people behind them if you get the home defense shells. At night, make sure it's not a fireman or a relative in from the airport by mistake. Wait and be sure…learn your state's protocols on deadly force steps. The Petit family were raped and burned to death in an affluent area …for the lack of a gun. That can't happen here. I grew up in hell and I'm always ready to give hell….after making sure it's not a fireman putting out our house. But if the guy's holding a glock and not a hose, he's headed for the particular judgement. ADP people tried to sell me a security plan after my last incident way above in my first post…" what if he returns" the man said…"he's dead" I said…." you could get in trouble" he said…."he's dead" I repeated…" for a monthly fee" he began…."he's dead" I said….now both he and the Latina with him are laughing out loud and they knew I was the security plan as they went back to their car.
December 17, 2012 at 11:21 pm
Siobhan-
might want to keep in mind that all of Europe, combined, is only about double the population of the US. (bing says the US has 314,686,189, and Europe has 739,165,030)
Got to define who counts as "The West," then look at how the stats are determined– per 1000 population? How are various crimes defined? What are the reporting standards? Etc.
It's kind of like when they find that the US has a much higher infant mortality rate…because we are much broader about what births are live births, rather than "miscarriages."
There's also the problem with limiting it to gun violence, rather than including things like bombings, knife assaults, gang attacks of various types, etc.
December 18, 2012 at 12:07 am
A robber is planning to hold up a restaurant after the busy lunch hour and take their cash. He pulls up in the parking lot about 1:30 Pm but sees a police officer inside eating. Does he carry through with the crime or abort? Pretty obvious he aborts. Does he abort because A) He respects law enforcement authority B) Knows someone is armed inside the restaurant. Hmm, pretty obvious that an armed citizenry prevents crime.
December 18, 2012 at 1:57 am
Bill, I'm just outside of Detroit so encroaching crime is a very real possibility. The only time I think about buying a gun is when there's cause to think it might become difficult to do so, but I truly am afraid of guns and really don't want one around. I don't even like sharp knives. Years ago when my kid got his first bb gun I was so concerned that someone outside would mistake it for a real gun and shoot him, I would only let him use it in the family room and shoot at his target. He accidentally shot out the screen on our first large screen TV when it was 2 days old. Luckily the warranty covered it.
In browsing through some more stats on gun-related deaths world-wide, I read one opinion that the reason there are more gun deaths in the US is because we're better shots :-).
December 18, 2012 at 2:41 am
Siobhan,
Other countries are often one nationality…we are many. We have the legacy of slavery and its resultant poverty class…Europe doesn't have that even though it was guilty in that process. We attract aggressive families from all over the world….Canada attracts more nature oriented people. Etc etc.
December 18, 2012 at 2:45 am
The Win Button of the gun control debate: Mexico's gun laws are stricter than virtually any European country except the UK, with entire types of ammunition being illegal for civilians to own.
Sure has helped there, huh?