Sandy Hook–One Year Later


One year ago today, a mentally disturbed individual murdered his mother, stole her guns, and proceeded to break into an elementary school and murdered 20 children and 6 teachers before killing himself.  There is absolutely no words that any one of us can say, that can totally bring peace and comfort to those families affected by this tragedy.  Our prayers do go to them, however, because even though we may not know them, most of us can only inadequately feel their pain over their loss.

Even before Sandy Hook, various gun-control organizations have taken to blame the gun for people committing horrendous acts of violence and murder.  No where have I observed except in passing the mentioning of a person being mentally ill or the action being criminal in nature.  Thus, the responsibility of the action is upon the object, not the person using it.

This is what this society, and this country, has come to –  a person does not bear responsibility for their actions.  Blame the tool, not the person.  This is like blaming the spoon and the gallon of vanilla ice-cream for a person becoming obese.  But I digress…

I fully understand that there are people out there that are not mature or responsible enough to own guns.  There are others that want nothing to do with them.  Still others that are violent or mentally incompetent have absolutely no business, legal or otherwise, to have a gun in their possession.  And I’m OK with that.

What I am not OK is for the various gun-control organizations and individuals that state through their own ignorance or hoplophobia (fear of firearms) that seek to disarm law-abiding people.

I’m not going to go on about our rights that are covered under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, but rather, something that should be more common sense that the legalized BS and blatantly emotional appeals that seem to permeate these types of discussions.

When proponents of gun control state that we need to restrict or ban guns, what are they really asking?  The thought is that violent toughs or mentally disturbed individuals would no longer have access to guns to commit acts of murder and violence.  That, my friends, is a fantasy. 

Guns have been banned in both Great Britain and Australia following mass shootings in those countries as a reaction to incidents similar to Sandy Hook.  What has happened is that while gun crime went down, other criminal activities such as assaults, rapes, theft, and even murder by other means (knives, clubs, hands, etc.) went up.  The unintended consequence of a ban on defensive weaponry is that criminals no longer have a fear of being injured or killed in the commission of a crime, and are thus emboldened to commit more and more violent crimes.

In other words, they want Grandma, Grandpa, parents, our wives and/or children not to have any means of defending themselves against a bigger, stronger person that means to do them harm.  They want you and yours to become victims to make them feel better about removing guns from our society.

This is not what the gun-control people want you to know – their thoughts are that we are all one big happy family, and we need to get rid of those horrible, evil guns to achieve Utopia.  The police / government is there to protect us from the bad people, and will keep us safe.  Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that is not the case.

Some reminders:

The police are under no legal obligation to protect the public.

Criminals do not need guns to commit violent crimes (just look at 9/11 and the recent “knock-out games” being reported.)

Gun control is not crime control.

Defensive uses of firearms outnumber the offensive uses of firearms.

Crime cannot be legislated away, otherwise there wouldn’t be any crime to begin with.

Finally, a report was released in November by the State of Connecticut Attorney’s Office that states that the shooter in the Sandy Hook murders encountered multiple staff members during the course of his rampage.  One can only speculate if one, just one, of the staff members had been armed that day if the outcome would have been much, much less…or can we?

On December 9, 2007, and individual approached the New Life Church in Colorado Springs with roughly the same weapons as the Sandy Hook shooter, but with far more ammunition intending to kill as many people as he could.  He shot four people in the parking lot before entering the church, where he was stopped & killed by a member of the church’s security team.

Let’s remember the mass shootings (New Life, Clackamas Town Center Mall, Pearl River High School, etc.) that were cut short because of citizens that carry weapons, including one that happened six years ago today.  This should be the lesson of Sandy Hook.

About these ads

About Tom Roland

EE for 25 Years, Two Patents - now a certified PMP. Married twice, burned once. One son with Asperger's Syndrome. Two cats. Conservative leaning to the Right. NRA Life Member.
This entry was posted in Gun Rights?, Political and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Sandy Hook–One Year Later

  1. Fantastic points. Something that the left and the gun control people always fail to see…..and they also fail to report those that were stopped because someone with a gun legally stopped the rampage before it got really bad. I love reading your posts. So full of logic and common sense. Something the left is sadly bereft of.

  2. Tom Roland says:

    Robert, while you and I agree that the Progressive Left is somewhat deficient in their logic and not understanding the laws of unintended consequences, I did leave the political affiliations of the gun banning crowd out of it. Here’s why:

    – Not all Conservatives are pro-gun
    – Not all Liberals are anti-gun
    – Not all Republicans are Conservatives
    – Not all Democrats are Liberal

    Gun control has become an emotional issue. The only way to counter any emotional issue is with logic & facts, and reminding these people of exactly what they are really asking for (providing they are not on an uncontrolled power trip to begin with). Ratcheting up the emotion serves no purpose.

    My thanks for your complements.
    reply from Robert: Yes I realize that, but sometimes I get caught up in the moment. Cause all you ever hear from are the liberal zealots who, like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, we need to do all these things. The part of the left that doesn’t believe this are for the most part silent. They, and the ones on the right who don’t believe in these things need to start speaking out so their voices can be heard too.

  3. Skunk says:

    Agree to both. I still tend to save most of my ire for the Left in general.
    reply from Wise Conservatism: As do we.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s