‘Can you tell us what happened today in school?” the Fox anchor asked eight-year-old Sofia Lebinski of Newtown, Conn.
In a calm voice, the little girl offered up a terrible answer to the most routine of questions. She heard shots. The teacher told her and classmates to get into the corner. Police officers knocked at the door and walked the class out of Sandy Hook Elementary School.
Comments
Great column.
I feel two emotions, and I seem to flash back and forth between them. Both are real. Both are connected. Both should be experienced by anyone with human feelings.
One is sadness and hurting and tears... and helplessness to make things better for those who have lost so much.
The other is a ferocious and unabated anger. How can we continue to allow such monstrous things to happen, over and over and over.
Anyone who opposes stringent control of firearms should go look in the mirror so they can become familiar with what a monster -- an enemy of civilization -- looks like.
Thanks for a great column.
Excellent column. Yesterday on Facebook an old friend chastised me for bringing up the issue of gun-control. "Today we should only think about the children" she said. I am thinking about the children and Gabby Giffords and all the other adults who are slaughtered in movie theaters and in their churches. We need to have a conversation about the 10,000+ hand gun murders each year in the U.S. If not now, when?
Great column.
I am afraid just like all the times before absolutely nothing will happen. People will be grief stricken, outraged, saddened, and wanting to do more to protect our children. However those that use the 2nd amendment as a weapon against reason will stonewall any attempts at rational though until time passes and these events pass from public awareness. We think the "fiscal cliff" defines the inability to reach compromise? Try to find a position of compromise with those that believe unfettered availability of guns is the solution to society's problems.
What kind of person can kill innocent little kids like that? What kind of society have we become?
I refer you the Dunblane Scotland incident of 1996, done by a youth worker/ suspected pedophile man who killed 16 children, one adult and himself. It was so shocking to the British public (whose men take to fisticuffs outside of pubs when they are unhappy) that they banned all personal handguns within a year. We, unfortunately, are too used to this kind of thing. We are much younger, impetutous and changeful country. The one thing that doesn't change is the paranoia and tendency to solve things with violence. An Italian friend of mine once comforted me by saying, "We Europeans don't despise your America. We know you are just an adolescent and have much to learn."
Mr. President, your tears are of little solace. These children, this nation needs justice through leadership. You must LEAD. You make the first move. Put the bill before the Congress. Shame them into voting. When good people remain silent, evil prevails.
The gun lobby would just like to point out that if the kindergartners were packing derringers in their lunchboxes along with the apple slices and juice boxes, the kids could've returned fire and this tragedy need never have happened. It's totally not the fault of responsible gun owners, including the mom, God rest her soul, who had assault weapons and ammo in her house althoughir she knew that her son was a lunatic.
I think you got some negatives because the default condition is to consider this heat-packing mama to be a poor little victim of her "evil" son. Unless we are able to figure out why she seems to have been into weaponry (and search her house to see if there's more), then understanding this crime/act of madness will be that much more frustrating.
The fact is, as shown by serveral studies, if a household weapon is ever used it most likely will be used against a member or members of the same household.
Protecting your person or property almost never happens.
As an old soldier, a gun owner and one who used to hunt, I am sick of the "guns don't kill people". Certain guns are meant to kill people, the entire purpose of an assault weapon is to kill people. It has no other purpose for existence. It is a killing machine. The old M-16, AR-15 served that as its only purpose. It wasn't invented to shoot deer or rabbits or any other four legged creature. It's purpose was to shoot two legged people.
Enough already. Sadly the NRA and its "soldier" wannabe's and every other kook who's seen to many Rambo movies will probably continue to get their way because the "good folks" in town won't stand up to the bullies. Background checks don't hurt honest hunters or those seeking self-defense. Assault weapons ban weapons meant for war, meant for soldiers not civilians. If the public cannot beat back the NRA over these two simple things then shame on the public.
Well said!
Everything you are saying makes sense. Restore the assault weapon ban for sure. I also wonder about this one: let's say they have tougher background checks for hunters and those seeking responsible gun ownership. Will that include drunk driving convictions? Because I can see some using that to disqualify them. The slippery slope, from the NRA point of view. The one person I remotely know who went to prison was a woman who mistakenly shot her husband while aiming at a bird while drunk. Drink and weapons do not mix, and anyone seeking to lower the accident rate with guns will take habitual drunkenness into consideration. That's a risk the NRA doesn't want to take.
This comment has been removed.
Joan, Chicago has the toughest gun laws in this country and the highest murder rate by guns. Mentall illness is our problem, society on a whole is our problem. When our culture changed so did the world, not for the better.
What then can we return to a time of civility when there were guns , but not assault weapons, but mass killings by civilians were unheard of?
It is time to take stock of the streak of violence that has made this the most violent country in the developed world. We did it to ourselves. We have enshrined it in our Constitution, a document meant to be reviewed from time to time and therefore needs to be dealt with directly. It is time to repeal the Second Amendment. It no longer is necessary in a modern society. In its place should be a set of very restrictive gun laws marking a transition to a more secure society as has been done courageously in countries such as Australia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia) It is time to discuss and move on the wrongheaded streak of individualism that has become an albatross around the neck of the nation. The glorifying of vigilantism must end. More people are killed with guns than in this country's wars each year. It no longer makes sense to let the gun lobbyist and individuals decide how guns are to be used. It is not just people who kill but people with guns who kill people. Self or household protection with a gun should be abandoned as a rational approach to violence. This is a tall order and will meet resistance but those who stand up for it now and realize it is a crisis will advance a necessary change that has heretofore caved in to those who prefer the primitive over social progress.
You cannot ban guns in this country. You have to pick and choose - getting rid of combat weaponry not rifles or revolvers. The fact is that we are a huge country with a long heritage of sparse settlements. Nobody is going to sleep easily unarmed on a remote ranch. And I would defend their right to be armed, even though I live in a New England suburb. I also remember the policeman who came to my mother's Connecticut house and shot a rabid raccoon which was stumbling around her yard. It's true the neighbors were shocked that we actually killed the varmint, but had my dad been there he'd have done it himself.
Politicians: Save your condolences, save your tears...they are cold comfort. It's time for all of you to FINALLY find the political courage to ban assault weapons in America! How many more must die senseless deaths because you won't face up to the fact that assault weapons are for war, not neighborhoods?A heartsick nation asks again and again and again.
Fact: if you make handguns illegal, eventually they will be removed from the citizenry. It may take fifty years, maybe a hundred. Eventually they would all be collected and destroyed. We would be a better nation for it. Another option would be to attach GPS chips to guns and allow just one location-the inside of your home, as soon as that gun begins to travel, police are notified.
This comment has been removed.
Go ahead liberals, keep blasting away at the NRA while ignoring mental illness and more importantly violent video games, TV and movies where showing ninjas killing people left and right is commonplace.
Go ahead, go after the 2nd amendment especially if you want to lose control of congress from now till perpetuity.
A reasonable ban on "assault weapons" is not an attack upon the 2nd amendment. I'll still have my shotgun, my hunting rifles. I am no longer in the Nam I don't need an assault weapon and neither does anyone else.
I agree with attaturk. The assault weapons ban merely expired. It needs to be revived, because nobody in this society, where so much else is regulated (driving for instance), needs to engage in combat in domestic life.
The firearms were purchased legally in a state with very stringent gun control laws and looking back at the most recent mass shootings in the country, the trend line is two fold - guns legally purchased - shooters mentally ill. I think you could easily argue that rather than more gun control, how about control of the untreated mentally ill? Just a few weeks back, in Brewster, a young man with documented mental problems but apparently not under tretment, burned down a local church - luckly - no one inside.
The ticking time - bombs in our midst.
Moreover - why was the mother, by all accounts a sane, professional and well grounded individual, bringing in Three police / military grade weapons into the household that she shared with a disturbed individual?
The usual people with the usual agendas on both sides of the gun control issue will now go into hyperbolic hyperdrive. " Ban assault rifles!! " not used in this incident. " Ninty day waiting period!! " - seems like that wouldn't have mattered either. " The 2nd amendment is sacred " - here we go again.
How about this - ID the young men who are mentally ill / anti social - and treat them whether they like it or not and place them on a No Gun Buy list. Otherwise, according to the statistics I heard widely quoted yesterday, we can expect the next mass shooting ( three or more casaulties ) in about two weeks - lets see ... that will be Christmas Week.
It's not just young men. And it's a much broader problem. Reagan cleaned out the mental institutions, but just moved them to the streets. Not all homeless are mentally ill, but many of the mentally ill are homeless. Removing social safety nets in the name of "fiscal responsibility" is shameful.
Not only that, this "mentally ill or developmentally disabled" shooter, said to have been autistic, never purchased the firearms, his mother did. I think you have to ask what motivated her. But she obtained them legally, apparently. At any rate, it seems to be the case. Looking into whether only her name and address were used is bound only to solve this one case. My relatives have kept guns, and they had many family members coming and going who could have picked them up. My father used to keep his rifle propped behind the back door of his ranch so he could casually walk out and shoot ground squirrels. Imagine a grandchild coming back to the dinner table with it, playfully shooting up the family. I made him lock it away in a case when I saw it. But I am sure he took it out as soon as I left. This is what it is to have guns around - not everyone in the family is as sure someone cannot be trusted with it.
So making the mentally ill unable to buy these weapons is not the cure (especially in a case like Newtown) that it might seem.
This comment has been removed.
As I see it there two ways to get guns under control. One way is to repeal the second amendment. The other is to be a strict constructionist. Do what Justice Scalia would do. Determine the intent of the framers. The framers intended few or no restrictions on gun ownership at the time. The guns they had in mind were the guns in existence then, muzzle loading flintlocks. Hunters could still hunt, people could still defend themselves and their homes and massacres by a madman would become impossible.
This comment has been removed.
/esfsdfsdf
I agree regarding mental health. There is a definite link between mental health services a gun culture and events such as this. As usual they will probably be sectioned off with nonsensical zealotry and partisanship with a total lack of rational discussion.
To repeat myself: Removing social safety nets in the name of "fiscal responsibility" is shameful. And, as you say, there's a definite link between a culture that idolizes guns and events such as this.
Although it may be hard to believe, Britain had an incident like this one in 1996. A forty-three year old youth worker in Dunblane (Scotland) with an accusation of pedophilia (though he wasn't arrested, only suspected and banned from contact with boys) took out his anger and frustration on school children, shooting 17 (dead), 16 of them children, and then committing suicide. This one incident pushed Parliament to ban all personal handguns for the entire realm. As people know, it used to be the case that bobbies in London were not even armed (don't know if they are now).
I know that this country has a different karma than Britain, including a different perception of freeom. We, unlike the Brits, also have a written Constitution whose second amendment would have to be amended. They also take a different attitude to what are our first amendment rights - they sue for slander a lot more than Americans ever do, because freedom of speech and press are more narrowly construed.
But our (legal) mother country was always less prone to these incidents, so when Dunblane happened they were shocked into action. Unfortunately we have a whole list of shootings almost as bad as this one. The elephant in the room is the role violence plays in our perception of the world, right back to the bloody founding days of the colonies, including bloody, bloody Connecticut. Somehow it is just hard to escape our karma.
I'm all for stricter regulations on gun ownership, but I doubt it would have much of an impact on mass murders. Actually, I think what motivates these depraved, deranged losers is publicity. This guy knew he'd be on the front page of every major newspaper in the country. He knew he would be the lead story on every newscast. He knew he'd be everywhere on the interest. He knew he would be famous. He knew he'd go down in history. That's the motivation and it's the same for all mass murderers. What we need to do is limit the news coverage of these incidents to the basics. Never name the killer or show his picture. After the initial report, nothing else. This would have a far greater impact on reducing mass murder than any gun control legislation.
To no one's surprise Joan, you did not write the entire truth about the uproar with Bob Costas. Costas was quoting Jason Whitlock, a race baiting columnist who referred to the NRA as the new Klu Klux Klan, wanting to kill black people! Costas admiited after, had he known about those comments he would not have used his words!!!
He took the cowrads way out but saying I don't want repeal the 2nd amendment, I was just quoting him!! A racist, good choice!!!
For an organization that treats saying the words Merry Christmas as a hate crime, I am not surprised. You are correct gun control needs to be addressed. People do have the right bear arms and have a gun. The overwhleming majority of people who owns guns are law abiding citizens. We have gun laws in Massachusetts and federal gun laws about people committing crimes with them getting harsher sentences but it is never enforced or rarely.
Rob Parker, who is black, questioned the blackness of Robert Griffin III, RG3, because he comes from a two parent black home, he graduated from high school a semseter earlier, finished his college degree in 3 years and is working on his masters. He is intelligent, articulate, funny, bright, athletic, a true leader. Somone any child, black, yellow, white, green, could put up as a role model. But because he doesn't beat up women, swear or grab his crotch, they question his blackness? Where is the outrage from the liberal media? Had a white columnist written this, you would be clamoring for his head!!!
The bigger issue is personal responsibility! Little Billy & Johnny can't be told they didn't win the game, it would hurt their self esteem. We can't print honor rolls in newspapers because some kids might feel left out. As a result we are bringing up children who cannot handle day to day living, can't handle stress, failure or rejection. We also don't have the intellectual integrity to point out that these people obviously have mental illness that contributes. Also, there are times when people just are inherently bad.
This is a debate that should be addressed HONESTLY, with respect from both sides. We know that respect will never come from the Globe!!!
This comment has been removed.
Just sickening.
test
Here's a place to start: Overnight we could severely restrict access to AMMUNITION. Just like with tainted food products, we could recall bullets and other ammo from the stores. Then we wouldn't have to get all the guns back right away. Eventually, people would run out of ammo. It might take a while, but . . .
This comment has been removed.
I like your idea!
If Adam had been forced to rely on a knife, he would have been overtaken by a handful of tough woman in the office and it would have ended there. Guns kill. And a culture that idolizes guns kills its children.
This comment has been removed.
You're right. Knives don't lend themselves to mass murder. They also require intimate contact with the victim. You can't stand 10 or 20 feet away. There are no drive-by stabbings. There are no stabbings through a door or from the roof or window of a building.
Who the heck needs a gun today? I mean, really? R-E-A-L-L-Y ???? Think of all the lives that would be saved. Common sense to me. You don;t NEED to hunt, you don;t NEED to own a gun.... complete crap argument. Say anything you want... guns = violence made easy, killing made easy.... GET RID OF THE GUNS.... PERIOD !!!!!!!!!!!
If one or more, kicks down your door at 2 a.m can you protect yourself and your family? By the time you are fully awake, it is too late.
With a gun as well. If you need protection, get a dog. Dogs don't hesitate.