Tragedy in Connecticut: Put The Blame Where It Belongs!

The shooting in Connecticut last Friday was tragic, sad, disgusting and just downright dreadful.  How could anyone justify the killing of 6 and 7 year-old children?  It cannot be justified.  There is no excuse.  I will not even use the shooters name.  I don’t want to give the nut case the front-and-center attention he may have craved.  The fact is we’ll never really know what was going through his mind.  He was a coward.

He was coward for attacking people who he knew full well could not defend themselves and for killing himself when the cops arrived. Now, the families of these small children must lay their babies to rest and someway, somehow try to move on with their lives.  But their lives are forever altered.  All we can do is to offer them our heartfelt sympathy and prayer.  I have one adult child and one teenager and even now, I cannot fathom what I would do if one of them were to fall victim to a head-case like this one.  My heart is broken for the little one’s lost.

The other side of this tragedy is, like it or not, political.  Why?  The politicians want it to be political.  It’s advantageous for them.  It’s yet another means to their end, albeit unintentional.  The political machine at-large began making hay with this story before the tiny victims were even identified!  This is now the 800 pound gorilla in the room; there’s no ignoring where this is headed, regardless of where you stand.  The gunfire had barely ended before Michael Bloomberg, the closet communist mayor of New York City, took to the media to demand President Obama act now.  Bloomberg hates things like our constitution.  It’s a pesky old document that gets in the way of his becoming king. That man is slimy.   People like Bloomberg would love to disarm you, but rest assured, his personal security detail will remain armed with the finest in semi-auto pistols and then some.

Diane Feinstein, the snarky senator from San Francisco, has vowed to revive the assault weapons ban that expired back in 2004.  She likes to use the word ‘clips’ often in her rants against guns.  After all these years, you’d think the old gal would know the difference between a clip and a magazine.  Oh, and just as an aside, you’d think she’d be more concerned with where taxes are headed, considering her net worth is upwards of $100 million dollars.  But then again most of her assets are reportedly held in ‘blind trusts’.  The notion that you might own a  Bushmaster or a drum magazine is something far more worthy of her time.

President Obama, looking sincere, went to Newtown, CT on Sunday:

“In the coming weeks, I’ll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens — from law enforcement to mental health professionals to parents and educators — in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this,” Obama said. “Because what choice do we have? We can’t accept events like this as routine. Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage? That the politics are too hard?”

On the surface, this sounds like a sincere effort to sooth the pain of a community that’s just come face-to-face with evil.  But, Mr. President, your lack of (promised) transparency in your administration, coupled with your political and social allegiances to seedy characters like Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis and others and your own big mouth have led many American’s to distrust you as we have distrusted no other president.  Still, you managed to find six million sheeple to re-elect you.  Bravo.  Please don’t take offense if some fail to see too much sincerity in your remarks, even on the heels of a heinous crime.

I know many of you have grown weary of the gun control argument.  So have I.  I have a fundamental right as a human being to desire to protect my family, myself and my property with at least an equal amount of force as is used against me.  I have a constitutional right to maintain arms in my home.  I have (in my opinion) a God-given right to self-preservation and protection.  You can pass all the additional laws you wish to all day long.  It will not stop morons like the one in Connecticut.  For those of you, who may wish to argue that my being armed is no answer, consider these facts:

-A 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, Miss., was halted by the school's vice principal after he retrieved the Colt .45 he kept in his truck.

-A 1998 middle school shooting ended when a man living next door heard gunfire and apprehended the shooter with his shotgun.

-A 2002 terrorist attack at an Israeli school was quickly stopped by an armed teacher and a school guard.

-A 2002 law school shooting in Grundy, Va., came to an abrupt conclusion when students carrying firearms confronted the shooter.

-A 2007 mall shooting in Ogden, Utah, ended when an armed off-duty police officer intervened.

-A 2009 workplace shooting in Houston, Texas, was halted by two coworkers who carried concealed handguns.

-A 2012 church shooting in Aurora, Colo., was stopped by a member of the congregation carrying a gun.

-Sunday at about 9:30pm, a man shot another person in the parking lot of a movie theater. The gunman then went inside the theater where he fired one round without injuring anyone. An off-duty Bexar Co Deputy working a security gig shot the gunman (thus ending the threat).

-Authorities in Alabama say a man opened fire in a hospital Saturday morning, wounding an officer and two employees before he was fatally shot by police (thus ending the threat).

-Nick Meli, a licensed gun carrier, was at Clackamas Town Center in Oregon with a friend and her baby when a masked man opened fire. Meli had the shooter in sight. However, he did not fire fearing he'd hit an innocent bystander. After seeing Meli, the shooter turned the gun on himself and pulled the trigger (thus ending the threat).

The one consistency you will find in so many of these shootings is the attackers go after people that are most likely unarmed.  They are cowards, plain and simple.  They will, more than likely, either surrender or off themselves before they’ll go toe-to-toe with an armed citizen.  Could an armed teacher or administrator have stopped the gunman in Connecticut?  At the very least, they could have minimized his carnage.  As it were, they were totally at his mercy, defenseless and helpless.  Some of the most restrictive gun measures are enacted around schools, so-called ‘gun free zones’, and yet this is exactly where the idiot in Connecticut showed up; he knew no one could challenge him.   I guess zero-tolerance really didn’t mean much to him, now did it?  This is a discussion and a debate we are going to be forced into by politicians who will use the tragedy to further their own agendas.  Those of us with a brain know the truth: disarming the good citizen does nothing to stop the evil assailant.