We've heard all the requisite yet meaningless nonsense about the need for "prayer" and "strength" and for Americans to "come together" during this time of tragedy. But several dozen people 'came together' in that Aurora movie theater, and unfortunately so did a killer armed like Rambo with various semi-automatic assault weapons. When the hell are we going to actually do something, other than regurgitate empty sermons, to ban these weapons and get them off the streets and out of the hands of these violent monsters who commit such diabolical acts? Both Obama and Romney referred to the killer and his heinous act as "evil," yet both resorted to the same old tired compassion-speak about 'coming together' and prayer.
On the Sunday talk shows it was no different, as surrogates from both parties spewed their political rhetoric. While calling for action on Fox News Sunday, California Sen. Diane Feinstein cautioned about the timing: "I think this is a bad time to brace a new subject." Seriously? Is there a better time to push for gun control legislation than after a horrific shooting like this one? Feinstein, like so many of her colleagues in Congress, lives in mortal fear of the NRA and its influence on millions of voters.
Speaking on the same program, Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson (R) spun the standard conservative rhetoric: "I really would hate to see a tragedy like this used to promote a political agenda to reduce Americans' freedom. Enough of our freedoms have already been taken away. We don't want to lose anymore." I'd like to know exactly which 'freedoms' he speaks of that have been "taken away" from him or anyone else. And, mind you, his very statement is just the sort of politicizing of the tragedy that he purports to be condemning. Johnson also suggested that if someone else was armed in that theater then maybe the killer would've been shot before he committed his carnage. This is another typical gun lobby spin. Yeah, that's exactly what we want. Let's have Old West-style gunfights in movie theaters, malls, parks, schools, offices, stadiums, supermarkets, libraries, etc. That'll reduce the body count, right?
This is a simple issue, people. It's a choice between allowing mass killers to easily purchase assault weapons and ammunition... or not. We can stick our collective heads in the sand and "come together" to talk about God, prayer, healing and sing Kumbaya, but none of that -- let me repeat...none of that -- will stop the blood from spilling again. Have we learned nothing in the past thirteen years from the deadly massacres at Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tuscon, etc? Unless, as New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (the only nationally prominent politician with balls) demanded, our elected officials pass new legislation outlawing assault weapons, our streets will continue to be littered with innocent dead bodies.
Follow Andy Ostroy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AndyOstroy
Mr. Ostroy, please share with us the method you would use to identify these "mass killers" prior to their crimes.
Gun advocates will tell you that gun owners thwart criminals all the time, so the loss of life incurred as a result of lax gun laws is "worth" it.
What about the gun owner who shoots somebody who doesn't deserve to get shot? Are their lives "worth" it too?
This is a stupid argument. I own assault weapons and body armor. But that doesn't mean I expect Society to indulge my violent fantasies.
If I wanted to build a peaceful, safe society, I would definitely restrict access to weapons that make cop's jobs harder. And I don't even like cops.
A handgun would be poor solace against a guy wearing cat IV body armor and wielding a rifle or shotgun. Unless you're packing a rifle, and you think you can shoot straight while you're trying to get out of the kill sack, an armed citizen wouldn't be able stop this guy. And shooting at him would have made him concentrate his fire on you. I would. You can't do anything if you're dead.
CO allows open carry of handguns and concealed carry with a permit. If your theory were correct, somebody WOULD HAVE stopped this guy. More likely, an armed citizen stupid enough not to get out of there would just add to the body-count.
It is NOT unreasonable for a citizen of the United States to be safe from people shooting them in public places.
These blockbuster horrors actually serve to deaden our thoughts about the daily toll of gun shot victims nation wide. These blockbusters make us think about gun control "every now and then" as these blockbusters happen.
We must say no more to thinking about gun control only when the blockbuster killings happen. We must stop thinking that is the only time murderous gun shots ring out.
They ring out every hour of every day, damn it!
Another example of a know-it-all who knows what I 'need' better than I do myself.
We have been doing something. We've reduced the murder rate by 47% over the last 20 years while firearm ownership has remained stable. The rate of incidents where the number of people dying in attacks that claimed four or more victims has fallen by around 30%. We have been doing something; you just haven't been paying attention. Of course, none of these facts fit with your "guns are evil, take them away" ideology.
Your argument has been proven wrong, many times over. That's why no one takes you seriously.