Tag Archives: NewTown Gun Murders

A Gun Owner Struggles with the Newtown Tragedy

“They were babies” echoes in my head as I contemplate my position on gun ownership. A stalwart defender of the right to bear arms, I have been in troubled contemplation these last few days over the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut.

The evil committed was and is indefensible, reprehensible.. devil himself kind of thing. Even if Mr. Lanza were so imbalanced, at what point did going after 6 year old children seem like an outlet? My daughter is 7.

I was unable to write a single news story, tweet or facebook post for days. We even had our Christmas party and I could not intelligently address the questions asked by all those who knew me to be an avid hunter, collector, competitor and gun business owner. I just couldn’t talk about it then. I can barely do it now.

I remember reading one of the first articles after the tragedy. The very first reader comment said “It is now time to repeal the second amendment”. I lost my breath. Could any American really believe that their government could never become so all-powerful as to abridge their basic human rights? Could this tragedy be the tipping point where Americans cede there rights in order to feel more safe?

This tragedy against innocents, children, was something no one can get a handle on and it is forcing irrational moves. The attack makes no sense and humanity seeks a God-like solution in the absence of God. That solution for them is government. Our society has nothing left to turn to but a government bent on taking as much power as the people will give it.

Many are calling for a national discussion on firearms restrictions. Throwing out odd comments like “I only put three bullets in my gun when I hunt”, the left is pushing a false narrative to achieve their ultimate goal – total gun control.

Gun ownership isn’t just about hunting. The second amendment wasn’t contemplated so that 236 years later we could hunt deer. Restricting that right limits the threat to future tyrants. How would the revolutionary war have gone if King Henry’s Redcoats had muskets and the colonists had been disallowed the use of current firearms? Our second amendment is about giving the rest of the Constitution the teeth it needs.

Now we watch as our representatives discuss how sharp or how many our teeth may be. Soon they will discuss whether we need teeth at all. I worry that the majority in America are willing to disarm in the false belief that they will then be more secure. Benjamin Franklin knew better when he said “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Killers like Harris, Klebold, Loughner, Holmes and more were going to do what they did. Their souls were dark. All of them Atheists,  some from broken homes, on some sort of psychological medication and unfit for society.

I worry about one of these soulless creatures driving a Toyota through the car pick-up line at my children’s school now. Seemingly, parents, teachers and medical professionals are unable to either diagnose, treat or even identify people with these afflictions.

I am an unassailable champion of individual liberties. Those liberties should extend so far as they do not imperil another’s freedoms. This kind of tragedy brings into question for many where that line lies.

Should Loughner and Lanza have been committed? I believe so. Why weren’t they? Many around them thought they were both “bombs soon to go off” so why wasn’t that the indication that psychological evaluation was necessary? When will our school and medical professionals be better able to identify warning signs?

Mental instability is certainly at the heart of the Newtown murders. There is no other explanation for a 20 year old man killing 6 year old children – none. It is also the cause of the Colorado theater tragedy, Columbine and so much more.

We’ve focused on the methods those men used to kill at every opportunity, but when will we focus on the reasons? Because politics drives so much of what we do these days, I expect we never will. Perhaps because we have been taught that it is impolite or not politically correct to point out that someone might have a mental illness. It is far easier to blame the inanimate object – the weapon.

Had it not been  a rifle, it would have been plowing through the bus line in his mother’s car, a homemade bomb or some other means to accomplish what he had already planned – he was committed to this outcome.

The previous assault weapons ban was in place when Columbine happened. In fact, it had been in place for five years. What thinking American believes that those Godless young men would not have found another way to do what they did no matter what laws had been passed? Once someone reaches the level of conviction that includes their own suicide, there are no deterrents – NONE.

Of course the anti-gun lobby will focus on the gun(s) as the reason for the tragedy. To them, it is totally logical that tragedy is impossible if guns are restricted. If wishes were horses…

Just last week in China a man stabbed 22 kids with a knife at an elementary school. In 2010, 20 children were killed in knife attacks.[2] Those evil men found other means in a society where guns are highly-restricted. The real question should center on why these men feel it necessary to take out their anger on children and how to identify them earlier.

We rarely, if ever, hear about the Americans saved each year by conscientious, gun-owning citizens. Although it is estimated that between 2.5 and 7 million crimes are prevented each year by someone using a gun in defense[1], those stories don’t make headlines – it takes a tragedy to make headlines. How many lives have been saved by gun ownership? How many were saved by a gun owner with a concealed gun permit when he stopped a mass killing from happening in Oregon? That story was successfully buried.

Gun crimes committed by legal gun owners is infinitesimal. Regulating those people more will do nothing and is a shameful way to honor those children murdered by an evil human being. If we are having an honest dialogue about how to prevent tragedies such as Newtown, we have to admit that we cannot legislate a perfect world and focus on identifying and helping troubled young men like Kliebold, Loughner and Lanza – or at a minimum, getting them off the streets before they harm others or themselves.

We seem focused on the manner instead of the intent. There is no law that can be passed that would prevent someone bent on the death of innocents from carrying it out – especially if they are willing to take their own lives in the process. An honest discussion would focus on the murderer and how to identify people like him before more tragedies erupt. If an honest discussion was what everyone at the table actually wanted.

Sources:
[1] Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz*- http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/kleck1.html
[2] Villager slashes 22 kids with knife at elementary school gates in China – http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/14/15901085-villager-slashes-22-kids-with-knife-at-elementary-school-gates-in-china?lite

Ban All Guns, But Whatever You Do, Don’t Violate the Violent Criminal’s Right to Commit Evil

stop the gun violence

As a resident of the state of Connecticut, I can state quite categorically that Connecticut has some of the strictest gun control laws in the United States. Despite those laws, the left insists that if  Connecticut imposed stricter bans, Newtown resident Adam Lanza would never have murdered 20 children and seven adults in a mass shooting.

The left continues making that claim, but so far this ideology toward  banning guns has never prevented gun violence or stopped monsters from obtaining guns. Anyone determined to commit violent crimes will purchase guns illegally if guns are banned.

Try telling that to leftists, they believe guns are the problem, the left wants guns put away, not the criminally insane, who seem to have more rights than innocent people who have a right to bear arms.

CNN’s Piers Morgan, who hails from gun free/high crime Britain, is an example of anti-gun leftist ignorance that views guns as the perpetrator, not violent people. Morgan insists gun-free zones prevent gun violence and  argued this flawed view with More Guns, Less Crime author John R. Lott who explained that “gun-free” zones attract those seeking gun violence:

Look at the [Aurora] movie theater one, for example. There were seven movie theaters showing the movie “Batman” movie within a 20 minute drive of where the killer lived. Only one of those banned guns. He [the killer] didn’t go to the movie theater closest to his home. He didn’t go to the movie theater with the largest screen. He went to the one movie theater that banned guns. Now if you look at bans generally…In the U.K. and Jamaica, Ireland, island nations that have banned guns, you can’t find a place where murder rates have actually gone down. They have gone up usually by large amounts.

 

bloody gun

 

 

Morgan’s reply to gun bans not preventing gun crimes is it’s “a load of nonsense,” and “Nobody needs one of these [guns] in their home, end of story.”

The left chooses to view mentally unbalanced people as harmless and guns as mentally unbalanced.

Leftist logic has never, in its progressive history, contributed laws preventing demented monsters from committing cold-blooded murder with guns or other weapons.  Instead, the left, who decided mentally insane should rehabilitate among society, claim: “[I]if all else failed, such horrors could always be attributed to improper implementation of Progressive programs, reflecting ‘not faulty conceptualization but inadequate funding.’”

Inadequate funding is not the problem.  Every violent mass gun spree has been committed by mentally deranged people who methodically plotted violence with intent to murder as many human lives as possible.

The left ignores facts in order to hone in on guns as perpetrators of gun violence.  If the mentally derange rehabilitate by committing violence against human beings, don’t blame their violent actions, blame guns!

 

guns kill people

 

That brings us to Adam Lanza. What if Lanza’s mother never owned a gun? Can anti-gun lobbyists guarantee Lanza would never have found a way to illegally purchase guns?  Can the left promise that people intent on mass murder will never use bombs to blow up schools or other public places? No one can make those promises. Evil does not alert law enforcement prior to the act, giving details to the plans. Violent people plot murder in secret and gun laws do not stop them from carrying out their intentions.

What about Connecticut gun laws?  Connecticut requires that gun owners  have permits to carry pistols in public, otherwise, “No state permit is required for the possession of rifles, shotguns or handguns. A person must be twenty-one years of age to possess a handgun.”  Furthermore, Connecticut enforces strict background checks on everyone registering to purchase guns. Adam Lanza was 20 years-old, he could not register or purchase handguns, so he stole his mother’s guns after murdering her.

Also, Connecticut’s strict gun laws demand:

It is unlawful to possess a handgun by a person who has been convicted of a felony; convicted as a delinquent of a serious juvenile offense which includes illegal possession of a controlled substance, negligent homicide, third degree assault, first degree reckless endangerment, second degree unlawful restraint, rioting, or second degree stalking; discharged from custody within the preceding 20 years after acquittal by reason of mental disease or defect; confined by court order for mental illness within the preceding 12 months; subject to a restraining or protective order involving physical force; or an illegal alien. It is unlawful to possess any other firearm by a person who has been convicted of a felony.

So far it doesn’t appear that Lanza had a criminal record. But that doesn’t change the fact that every criminal has a first time.

As far as “assault weapons” go, Connecticut  gun laws state

No person shall possess any “assault weapon” unless that person possessed that firearm before October 1, 1993 and received a certificate of possession from the Connecticut State Police prior to July 1994

When registering in this state, Connecticut law demands “The applicant must successfully complete a handgun safety course approved by the commissioner.”

Connecticut forbids gun owners from storing “any loaded firearm on any premises under his control if” an underage teen or child can gain access to the weapon.” The state requires gun owners to keep guns “secured…in a locked container.”

If Nancy Lanza securely stored her guns, firearm laws did not stop her son from acting out in violence.

Moreover, it’s illegal in Connecticut to carry firearms on public, private elementary or secondary school property.  Strict gun laws did not prevent Lanza from entering the school and shooting 27 people.

But it’s not the criminals’ fault. Laws are ignored by violent criminals, whose guns should have told them: “You cannot use me to murder other people, it’s wrong, and I will be forced to take all the blame!”

Facts remains: Evil people will always plot and carry out malevolent deeds. Banning guns, titling guns “assault weapons”, blaming guns for violence and not people,  hasn’t prevented murderous lunatics from obtaining guns. Banning guns in America will never prevent illegal gun possession, it will only lead to crimes against the innocent without rights to bare arms.