Previous post:

Next post:

Obama Uses Newtown Speech to Tee Up Gun Control Fight

by Keith Koffler on December 16, 2012, 10:43 pm

President Obama used an appearance in Newtown, Connecticut Sunday night to launch what is likely to be a major Democratic-led effort to limit gun rights.

Instead of using the remarks to comfort a grieving nation, Obama decided the widely seen appearance was a better forum for beginning a new anti-gun campaign that he believes will help reduce the chances for killings with firearms.

Anticipating the arguments of pro-Second Amendment advocates who will fight him, Obama suggested the amendment’s rationale that an armed citizenry guarantees freedom is outweighed by what he sees as a cost in lives, and that limits on gun rights are worth it even if it only helps a little.

We will be told that the causes of such violence are complex, and that is true. No single law, no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society, but that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely we can do better than this.

If there’s even one step we can take to save another child or another parent or another town from the grief that’s visited Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek and Newtown and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that, then surely we have an obligation to try.

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, 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?

Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?

But during the last five years, while gun sales have risen dramatically, violent crime has steadily decreased, according to the FBI.

In a tactic that was honed to perfection by the Clinton administration to press for all kinds of new federal programs and regulations, Obama signalled that the coming crusade for stronger gun control measures will be framed as a way to help children.

The effort will put opponents of Obama’s agenda in the awkward position of seeming to be in opposition to children as well.

Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?

I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer’s no. We’re not doing enough. And we will have to change. Since I’ve been president, this is the fourth time we have come together to comfort a grieving community torn apart by mass shootings, fourth time we’ve hugged survivors, the fourth time we’ve consoled the families of victims.

And in between, there have been an endless series of deadly shootings across the country, almost daily reports of victims, many of them children, in small towns and in big cities all across America, victims whose — much of the time their only fault was being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change.

Obama, who teared up yet again in discussing the tragedy, indicated that the issue is now personal for him, a sign he will wage the battle relentlessly and that gun control, largely ignored during his first term, will move straight to the top of his agenda. Polls show Americans by a solid majority favor leaving gun control laws as they are or weakening them, and a first trem drive by the president to restrict gun rights could have cost him valuable votes in swing states.

But with the election behind him, the gloves may be off.

Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?

I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer’s no. We’re not doing enough.

Speaking on Meet the Press, Sen Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she will introduce legislation to ban “assault weapons” and high capacity ammunition clips.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), one of Obama’s closest allies om Capitol Hill, indicated he might go further. “We need to sit down and have a quiet and calm conversation on the Second Amendment,” Durbin said.

FREE ROAMING FOR INTERNATIONAL CALLS!
Check out the best international Sim Cards and save up to 80% on your phone calls, go to roaming free sims and travelsim!

{ 2 trackbacks }

{ 61 comments }

Brian December 16, 2012 at 10:53 pm

“Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek and Newtown and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg”

Only common denominator? Gun-free zones.

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 8:10 am

Washington, D.C. bans guns as well. How’s that working out for them?

Star December 17, 2012 at 10:28 am

After being attacked in a home invasion in DC in 1981, we had aa .45–but the laws did worry us that WE would get in trouble.

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 1:49 pm

My sympathies, Star. You know the saying, though. “It’s better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6″.

Unfortunately, you’re robber’s next of kin will get a lawyer, who will legally get them a piece of everything the dearly departed failed to steal from you illegally if you drop him. They’ll come up with some “wrongful death” thing; parade a bunch of unlettered children thought the courtroom that may or may not be his (and he may or may not have ever even admitted parentage, let alone taken care of them); and play the jury until all your wordly goods are transferred to the next generation of criminals, and the woman or womEN who whelped them.

Your case will turn on politics and emotions, and be heaviliy influenced by local sentiments and local politics. And you’re in DC? Crikey! Facts are basically irrelevant, so make sure you can put on a good show.

Good luck, God bless, and get a good lawyer on retainer. I fear that you’ll need all three of these things, sooner or later…

Star December 17, 2012 at 6:16 pm

Well, I no longer live in DC or have a gun. But let me tell you, we soon learned that everyone we knew carried in DC! People will do what people will do.

Jeff1000 December 17, 2012 at 1:55 pm

The antidote to violence is called “self-defense”, and being able to defend the people, like children, who cannot defend themselves. After seeing the heartbreaking carnage in one of the most restrictive gun control states in the nation, to call for, or even suggest, even more defenselessness defies logic and the cold hard facts, yet it is perfectly consistent with the “president’s” across-the-board policy of doubling down on stupid:

If the country is drowning in debt, spend more; if our enemies abroad threaten to destroy us or our allies, appease them; if mass murderers slaughter our children in our schools, disarm the defenders.

The police can only do so much, and we are ultimately responsible for our own safety, and for the safety of those who cannot defend themselves.

Susan December 17, 2012 at 3:02 pm

Well said and so true, Jeff.

Molly December 16, 2012 at 11:05 pm

“Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?”

We’re aborting them at a rate of 3500 per day in the US, with his blessing. Stunning hypocrisy.

Anne Lieberman December 17, 2012 at 7:36 am

My thoughts exactly. Had these children had been murdered in utero, he would have been all for it, would have celebrated it as an expression of someone’s “fundamental right.” As appalling as it is to spell it out, this is probably the only argument that could stop him in his tracks.

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 8:17 am

He doesn’t seem to mind letting infants die cold and alone, and legally restristing anyone from helping a child who somehow survives the murder attempt and is born alive and viable, either.

‘I am a Registered Nurse who has worked in the Labor & Delivery Department at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois, for the past 5-1/2 years. Christ Hospital performs abortions during the second and even third trimesters of pregnancy.

The abortion method being called into question that Christ Hospital and other Illinois hospitals practice is called “induced labor abortion.” This abortion technique sometimes results in infants being aborted alive. In the event that an infant is aborted alive at Christ Hospital, she or he is given no medical assessments or care whatsoever, but is left to die.

The induced labor abortion procedure can be performed using a couple different medications, but the goal always is to cause a pregnant woman’s cervix to open so that she will deliver a premature baby who dies during the birth process or soon afterward. At Christ Hospital the physician inserts a medication called Cytotec into the mother’s birth canal next to the cervix. The cervix is the opening at the bottom of the uterus that normally stays closed until a mother is about 40 weeks pregnant and ready to deliver. But Cytotec irritates the cervix and stimulates it to open early. When this happens, the pre-term baby drops out of the uterus, sometimes alive.

In the event that a baby is aborted alive at Christ Hospital, he or she is not given any medical care, but is rather given what my hospital calls “comfort care.” “Comfort care” is defined as keeping the baby warm in a blanket until the baby dies, although until recently even this was not always done. The baby is then offered to the parents to hold until he or she dies.

If the parents do not want to hold their dying aborted baby, as is most often the case, it is left to nursing staff or support staff on the floor to hold the baby until he or she dies. And, until this past December, when staff did not have time or the desire to hold the baby, the baby was taken to our Soiled Utility Room and left there alone to die. Christ Hospital’s comfort care policy, #WHS492, only requires that live aborted babies be checked for signs of life once an hour, or “as needed in order to verify time of death.”

It is not uncommon for a live aborted babies to linger for an hour or two or even longer. At Christ Hospital, one of these babies once lived for almost an entire eight-hour shift. Last year alone, of the 13 babies that I am aware of who were aborted at Christ Hospital, at least four lived between 1-1/2 to 3 hours, two boys and two girls. Christ Hospital says that it compassionately aborts babies with very serious mental or physical handicaps. But Christ Hospital will also abort for life or health of the mother. So at least two of the second-trimester babies who were aborted last year, for instance, were completely healthy.

One night, a nursing coworker was taking an aborted Down’s Syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have time to hold him. I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived. He was 21 to 22 weeks old, weighed about ½ pound, and was about 10 inches long. He was too weak to move very much, expending any energy he had — trying to breathe.

Toward the end, he was so quiet that I couldn’t tell if he was still alive, unless I held him up to the light to see if his heart was still beating through his chest wall. After he was pronounced dead, we folded his little arms across his chest, wrapped him in a tiny shroud, and carried him to the hospital morgue where all of our dead patients are taken.

Other coworkers have told me about incidences of live aborted babies whom they have cared for. A Support Associate told me about a live aborted baby who was left to die on the counter of the Soiled Utility Room, wrapped in a disposable towel. This baby was accidentally thrown into the garbage, and when they later were going through the trash to find the baby, the baby fell out of the towel and on to the floor. A nursing coworker told me about an incident she was involved in last spring that she said “I just can’t stop thinking about.” She participated in the abortion of a healthy 23-1/7 week baby who was given no medical assessments or care after delivery, but was allowed to languish for 2-1/2 hours until she died, even though she showed early signs of thriving.

Just three weeks after this baby was aborted, another mother came to the hospital under similar circumstances, carrying an identically aged baby, and she was offered the same options. But she said that she wanted her baby. And so present at her delivery – because Christ Hospital is a Level III mother/baby care hospital — was a neonatologist, a pediatric resident, a pediatric nurse, and a respiratory therapist – all assigned specifically to take care of that little girl at delivery. And for the two days that I tracked her, that little girl lived. Christ Hospital is one of only 11 hospitals that the State of Illinois has designated as a level III perinatal institution — its highest ranking — which means that Christ Hospital is considered to have both the best equipment and the most highly trained medical personnel care for the sickest of the sick mothers and babies.

Another nurse friend told me about the patient she was caring for who had chosen to abort her second trimester baby, having been told that the boy had gross internal and external fetal anomalies. When her baby was aborted alive, however, he looked fine. The mother became hysterical and screamed for someone to help her baby. A neonatologist was called over, but told the family that the baby had been born too early to help. The mother was so traumatized that she had to be tranquilized, and it was left to the grandparents to hold the little baby boy the ½ hour that he lived.

Last July, I was asked to testify before the U. S. House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution regarding the babies I knew about who were aborted alive and left to die at Christ Hospital. Another nurse who worked at the hospital, but who has since moved to Virginia, Allison Baker, also agreed to testify. Allison described walking into the Soiled Utility Room on two separate occasions to find babies left naked on a scale and the metal counter. She told about the patient, that she herself had, who didn’t know that her aborted baby might be born alive, and after he was taken to the
Soiled Utility Room she kept asking, “Is he dead yet? Is he dead yet?”’

http://www.illinoisrighttolife.org/newpage36.htm

Yep, he loves the small children. The little, tiny children? Not so much.

Renee Barnhart December 16, 2012 at 11:11 pm

I listened to his speech and was actually expecting more political talk than there was. I am no fan of Obama. However, his speech was good. I felt better after I heard him talk.
Now, I feel that many of the political groups are grasping at pro or con on gun control issues. Please let it rest. Can’t you instead report on the children, their families, positive things, anything other than the gunman or political agendas? Let the community mourn. Let them come together and support one another. You reporting on such things is not helping them or the the rest of the US come together. There is a time and place and neither are that right now!

jimg December 17, 2012 at 1:25 am

I wasn’t aware that you, Renee, were the arbiter of when and where certain subjects should be discussed.

Car in December 17, 2012 at 8:45 am

Obama basically called for gun control in the speech. The POTUS. During a crises. If that doesn’t scare you … you’re not paying attention. He’s not coming together. He is going to use this, like he used those grieving families last night.

cindylou December 16, 2012 at 11:18 pm

Thanks obama-let’s make our populace more defenseless than it already is

idiot

cindylou December 16, 2012 at 11:22 pm

“Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek and Newtown and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg”

Killeen Texas?
Fort Hood?
hello?!!!!

I think there were 13 people killed there-maybe I am imagining things.

dang it sucks he was re elected

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 8:19 am

Sure takes the heat out of Benghazi, doesn’t it?

And does anyone else notice that the tears come from the rear corners of his eyes, and only when he presses a tissue there first?

ImNoDhimmi December 17, 2012 at 8:59 am

I think he has tiny little sacs of glycerin somewhere near the far sides of his eyes, that he can pop on cue. It’s all acting with Barry.

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 2:10 pm

I’ve heard he has tiny little sacs elsewhere too, as evinced by the way Michelle Antonette and ValJar run him…

Justice Kahlil Makaveli December 16, 2012 at 11:28 pm

To use this format and situation and tragedy to spread Fear and to Divide In order to defend the “Use” of “Assault Weapons” is a tragedy on a whole other level. Consider yourself my Enemy Sir.

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 1:55 pm

“Consider yourself my Enemy Sir.” – Justice Kahlil Makaveli

Only fair, he’s considered YOU to be HIS enemy for as long as he can remember. You’re an American, yes? Then you are his enemy.

srdem65 December 16, 2012 at 11:34 pm

The one thing these killings have in common is that the murderers were mentally ill and that’s not something that can be fixed with a scrapping of our constitutional rights.

The same regime that used Fast & Furious to arm citizens of a foriegn country that resulted in the death of at least one American and hundreds of Mexicans, that promotes the killing of unborn children, and sends drones to kill American citizens that have been accused of wrongdoing without a legal basis has no standing to disarm a peaceful population.

beeta December 17, 2012 at 12:03 am

I am not to sure these murders are not staged and back by Obama administration to ramp up his sympathy for Gun control… I put nothing past this dog…

Stephanie lee December 17, 2012 at 12:06 am

He makes me ill!

Chas December 17, 2012 at 12:12 am

As Rahm said a few years back, never let a serious crisis go to waste.
I for one, still find it incomprehensible, given the focus on children, and parents, that the first lady, was not there. I guess there is a lot to packing to do for Hawaii.

Girly1 December 17, 2012 at 5:20 am

Yesterday one of the liberal commentators remarked that gun sales have risen dramatically in the last few months, inferring that criminals are stocking up on weapons. What no one bothered to explain is the reason behind those gun sales – the fear that Obama would get a second term and terminate our Second Amendment rights.

Newtown is the perfect storm. Evil has visited this small town twice in one week. First, the horrific massacre of innocents by a madman and, secondly, the presence of another type of madman who is hell-bent on killing our individual rights as defined in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. God help us all!

Langley Spook December 17, 2012 at 7:36 am

spot on.

Wondering.... December 17, 2012 at 8:36 am

Correct.

ImNoDhimmi December 17, 2012 at 9:01 am

She’s too busy being fitted for a new ultra-control, high containment bathing suit.

Gringo December 17, 2012 at 6:05 am

Isn’t it great when a politician uses a memorial service to further an agenda. He wants to preach to us about gun control when Erick Holder loaded the cartels down with all the assault rifles they could carry. This so-called president has no shame.

Just2old December 17, 2012 at 6:29 am

He did the same thing in the Aurora memorial service.

Star December 17, 2012 at 1:35 pm

And then HE went right back to provocative, snide, mean speech!!

Wondering.... December 17, 2012 at 8:38 am

Yep. Hate how he inserted himself into this.

Just2old December 17, 2012 at 6:33 am

Because strict gun control has worked so well in Chicago, right mr. preezy? Concealed carry is the only measure that has shown to be a deterrent to violent crime in the states that have it.

Langley Spook December 17, 2012 at 7:35 am

BTW…where the hell was “Flotus” Michelle?

Guillermo Grande December 17, 2012 at 7:50 am

Shopping… For cake.

Langley Spook December 17, 2012 at 8:05 am

Mr. Koffler,
Are we allowed to ask why “Flotus” was NOT at that service?

Lizzy December 17, 2012 at 8:20 am

People ask but no answers she’s either in Hawaii, getting her new
wardrobe ready or just couldn’t be bothered to go. I imagine she’s
told him that this next four years she’s only doing the minimum unless
it’s party.

Girly1 December 17, 2012 at 8:56 am

She gave a speech at some ‘previously scheduled’ event on Friday, so she was definitely in town. Wouldn’t you think that she would be at her husband’s side, especially after he wept on national tv, and then told the grieving families that this was the worst thing that has happened to him since he has been president? Shouldn’t she be wiping away his tears?

Her true colors (no pun intended) are coming to the surface now. She cares nothng about your kids – her $7B ‘Let’s Move’ act was a stunt to put $$$ in the coffers of the teachers unions and political cronies. Her ‘healthy foods’ initiative in public schools was an epic fail and has been abandoned.

If the families at Sandy Hook had been black, she would have been there in a heartbeat. If anyone has any doubt, take a listen to her radio interview with the black radio talk show host (Joyner?)
that Keith posted a few days ago. Sickening.

ImNoDhimmi December 17, 2012 at 9:05 am

Imagine if Mr. Romney had been elected. Imagine how different his response to this tragedy would have been. Imagine Ann Romney consoling the parents and a grieving nation.

If only.

DeniseVB December 17, 2012 at 8:17 am

Much hasn’t been reported yet as it’s still a continuing investigation. Obama should have waited until it was completed before he blamed “anything”.

The system works, Dick’s Sporting refused to sell Lanza a gun earlier because he didn’t want the background check and waiting period. That should have been a red flag and reported to authorities as suspicious.

Otis Driftwood December 17, 2012 at 9:48 am

Currently there is no system in place to capture this type of activity (“he didn’t want the background check and waiting period”). It would not be deemed “suspicious” as we had customers do that all the time. You could make a phone call to the local PD, but they would probably make it a “in house” report and it would not go any further. If a customer gives that answer, then a background check as apart of the ATF 4473 form is not made. There would not even be a form partially filled out.

Tim December 17, 2012 at 8:22 am

Assault weapons were not used in this tragedy. Only two hand guns and a hunting rifle. Another example of Obama’s “let not tragic opportunity go unused” philosophy of leadership.

William Hardy December 18, 2012 at 4:53 pm

Tim, this statement runs counter to what has been reported. Please supply your sources.

Quintus Arrius December 17, 2012 at 8:32 am

Hey, let’s set up a register of Schizophenics/Asperger’s patients instead Mr.President. The ICD-9 codes are 295.XX and 299.80. Like a sexual predator register. Through the register we can assess if these people have access to guns, knives, crossbows, throwing stars, tactical gear, smoke grenades,concussion grenades, pipe bombs, and chemical bomb-making components. We will be able to indentify if these people have medication supervision, counseling or mentoring within the medical community. Or we can start rebuilding insane asylums.
Disarming the population doesn’t sound so good by comparison.

Darkangel December 17, 2012 at 11:24 am

That’s not as good an idea as you think.

Suppose, for instance, that Obama orders every VA hospital to make certain “routine” inquiries about veterans’ mental health and political views at their next scheduled visit.

Do I have to type out the rest?

Car in December 17, 2012 at 8:42 am

This man is truly frightening.

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 8:50 am

A couple of other things in the pot here;

It has been pointed out that some of these school shooters are on various “behavioral” meds. In this day and age, it is not uncommon for any child to be given various types of mood and concentration drugs, alone or in combination, usually to make it possible for a child to continue attending very stressful public schools.

Obamacare gives the Government a way to create a huge database of every child who has had behavioral meds, even once, in their life. This can be used, with current law, to restrict them from legally owning a gun. Ever.

Just food for thought.

As to people who want this to make sense, people who want to rationalize this, people who want to find the “root cause” so it can’t happen again, I say this; you will fail.

I worked for a time with the violently mentally ill. I can tell you with some authority on the subject, that they are – violently mentally ill. This means that they do not have rational thought processes, do not do things for “reasons”, and sometimes do not even realize what they have done after they have done it.

You (I’m speaking broadly here) have rational, logical thought processes. You are capable of understanding cause and effect, and higher concepts like the sacredness of life. It is not possible for you to comprehend a thought process that, by definition, is irrational. You cannot anticipate what someone who thinks nothing like you will do, or why. It does not help that every mental dysfunction is different, and that one person’s mental illness may make them respond to external stimuli in a completely different manner than another may react to that same stimuli. We can’t know what was going through this person’s head, because it does not make sense to sane people. Even if you could somehow get a copy of his final thoughts, it would STILL not make sense, because you’re sane, and he was not.

Many of you are probably too young to remember the Boomtown Rats. They wrote a song about another school shooting many years ago, where all these questions came up, and eveyrone wanted to understand what went wrong with this promising young woman who shot random children at an elementary school across the street. They failed. The song sums it up;

“All the playing’s stopped in the playground now
She wants to play with her toys a while.
And school’s out early and soon we’ll be learning
And the lesson today is how to die.
And then the bullhorn crackles,
And the captain crackles,
With the problems and the how’s and why’s.
And he can see no reasons
‘Cause there are no reasons

What reason do you need to die?”

http://www.metrolyrics.com/i-dont-like-mondays-lyrics-boomtown-rats.html

The actual story was;

“On 29 January 1979, 16-year-old Brenda Ann Spencer opened fire on children arriving at Cleveland Elementary School in San Diego from her house across the street, killing two men and wounding eight students and a police officer. Principal Burton Wragg was attempting to rescue children in the line of fire when he was shot and killed, and custodian Mike Suchar was slain attempting to aid Wragg.
Spencer used a rifle her father had given her as a gift. As to what impelled her into this form of murderous madness, she told a reporter,”I don’t like Mondays. This livens up the day.”
The “Mondays” comment was not the only eyebrow-raising declaration to issue from Spencer that day. According to a report written by the police negotiators who spoke with her during the six-hour standoff, she made
such comments to them as ”There was no reason for it, and it was just a lot of fun”; ”It was just like shooting ducks in a pond”; and ”[the children ] looked like a herd of cows standing around, it was really easy pickings.”
That Spencer failed to kill any of the children she shot at was attributable to luck rather than any reluctance on her part to take their lives. The bullet that struck 9-year-old Charles “Cam” Miller missed his heart by about an inch.”

http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/mondays.asp

It doesn’t make sense. It won’t make sense. You can’t fix it.

You can try to outlaw guns, of course. If you ignore the role of weapons in our society, the fact that it’s not possible to pass a law that criminals will obey regarding guns, and the empirical evidence concerning cites with the toughest gun laws also have the highest gun violence because the citizens can’t defend themselves, you can outlaw guns. Will this eliminate mass murders?

“Guns aren’t even the most lethal mass murder weapon. According to data compiled by Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of Corrections, guns killed an average of 4.92 victims per mass murder in the United States during the 20th century, just edging out knives, blunt objects, and bare hands, which killed 4.52 people per incident. Fire killed 6.82 people per mass murder, while explosives far outpaced the other options at 20.82. Of the 25 deadliest mass murders in the 20th century, only 52 percent involved guns.”

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/07/aurora_shooting_how_did_people_commit_mass_murder_before_automatic_weapons_.html

No.

All you can do to counteract an insane individual with a weapon, or even his bare hands, is to be armed and prepared yourself. You can only match force with force. Disarming the law abiding and the sane is not the solution.

ImNoDhimmi December 17, 2012 at 9:09 am

Excellent post, thanks.

Danceswithtruth December 17, 2012 at 12:14 pm

Awesome post!

I raised a child who could very well wind up doing something horrific. I’m not sure it would go to this level, but I can’t rule it out either. She is ADHD and Bipolar. She has been treated since fourth grade. As a teen we called the police on her, had her in the psych ward at a local hospital, had her in continuous counseling, etc. Her manic stage was rage and when she went into it, you absolutely could tell. Her eyes would glaze over and other physical signs were present. Afterward, she would feel bad about what she had done, in many cases not even remembering events.

She is an adult now. I have absolutely no control over her. As with many mentally ill individuals, they begin to feel better and go off their medications. As an adult, you can’t force them. She now has a child, which just adds to her stress level. I fear for the child, but since she has done nothing “wrong” yet, the authorities cannot and will not do anything. Unfortunately, in these type of scenarios it’s waiting until something happens before something can be done. Usually by that time, it’s too late for somebody.

There is no way to make any sense out of the senseless. There is no way to rationalize this. We can only hit our knees.

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 1:50 pm

“We can only hit our knees.”

Very well said.

Girly1 December 17, 2012 at 9:37 am

The heartbreaking struggle of one mother and her as yet undiagnosed 13 year old son is going viral on the internet. She laments the fact that the only form of long-term treatment left for her son is the prison system since all state funded institutions have been shuttered. No parent should have to suffer the burden of caring for a ticking time bomb and the horrific results that resulted in Newtown. Newtown isn’t about gun control – it’s about placing these severely disturbed kids in a contained environment away from society where they can receive full-time treatment for as long as it takes.

http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html

CiscoKid December 17, 2012 at 9:44 am

Yes Senator Durbin , let’s have a conversation about the 2nd Amendment, then that pesky 1st Amendment.
Then with those out of the way, we can then converse ( eliminate ) those other irksome amendments, 4th, 5th, etc.
Of course to make us safer.
Darn Constitution.

Susan December 17, 2012 at 10:19 am

Why do leftists always run to create more liberty-stealing laws rather than take a moment to find out the how and why behind the murderer’s sick and evil behavior?

Just as the collapse of the housing market can be traced back to the Community Reinvestment Act signed by Jimmy Carter, the unintended consequence of mainstreaming the mentally ill can be traced back to another Carter initiative – CRIPA – Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act. This law, administered by the DOJ, makes it near impossible for caretakers to hospitalize the mentally ill against their wishes.

Rather than passing more draconian liberty-stealing laws “for the children”, why don’t we learn from our mistakes of the past and repeal this law that allows psychopaths to walk the streets among us.

Star December 17, 2012 at 10:27 am

You cannot eliminate all tragedies, that is a stupid statement. If you institute all sorts of additional hoops for people to jump through, the people who really WANT guns will get them and still have them. The intense ones, which can be problemmatical. My ex- was a competitive pistol shooter–they all had arsenals. And could get more arsenals. AND–the gun controls we already have may have prevented a thousand Newtowns–we have no way of knowing what passed us by.

WMP December 17, 2012 at 11:36 am

After watching a couple of hours of coverage on Friday – I made a decision not to watch anymore – it is too sad and there are no right or wrong answers – just lots of questions and what ifs. Although I knew Pres. Obama would use the opportunity I did not watch him either. I’m sure he said some comforting things; based on the comments on this site and from Keith – I believe you are saying he also used it to make some political statements. If it was such a national tragedy (which it was), why wasn’t the first lady accompanying him. I can’t imagine that any prior first lady would not have been there.

Why can’t these politicians, the media and others give the families time to grieve and bury their children and loved ones. Can’t they wait for another day to start the dialogue. I had an e-mail from a friend as early as Friday evening about signing a petition to finally do something about gun laws. At the time of the e-mail I believe there were still stories circulating by the media that were totally incorrect such as how did he buy so many guns, etc.

cincycinco December 17, 2012 at 1:34 pm

“Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard?” – Obama

Sorry, were we talking about the border patrol agents and innocent Southwestern U.S. citizens that are murdered by illegal drug and gun runners come up from Mexico, some with high caliber weapons that were given to them on the orders of the Attorney General of the United States? No?

Well, is it about innocent Chicagoans that are killed daily by recidivist dope dealers that somehow manage to get all the guns they want, and all the freedom they want besides, because the Government can’t convict them, keep them in jail, give them a meaningful sentence, or have enough jails for them in the first place? Not that either?

Maybe it’s about securing our overseas embassies on the anniversaries of known dates for terrorist attacks when there’s lots of intelligence to indicate they will happen, including the well-founded fears of the Ambassador himself? Also no?

I apologize, they all kind of looked like they might fit this particular part of the statement…

Langley Spook December 17, 2012 at 3:02 pm

Well Said.

Star December 17, 2012 at 1:46 pm

Someone said they stopped watching the coverage. I did, too…some of the theology–that priest with the dimple who is always on saying we might not want to think this, but God was right there with each child as the child was shot…well, I bailed and watched my DVR list. I also don’t need a president who is not a regular church goer preaching verses at me. There was too much time to fill, too little information, and no one really knows squat.

Langley Spook December 17, 2012 at 3:08 pm

I am with you.
This coverage is getting too much (even on FNC the past few days) I under the “media” luvs & feeds off of these tragic events…but enough is enought.
The world & current events move on. I am only getting ‘real news’ online today, FNC is over-reporting this now.

Star December 17, 2012 at 6:10 pm

Went to THE FIVE, which I like–and more more more of the same….

Jackson Keddell January 3, 2013 at 2:07 am

I must point out that this statement by the writer :

“Polls show Americans by ‘a solid majority’ favor leaving gun control laws as they are or weakening them”

is linked to accurate data but misrepresented by the author. Only 11% of respondents want weaker gun control. 88% want gun laws the same or more strict than is currently the case. Less than 10% have wanted less strict gun laws in every listed poll there for the last decade.

This is in spite of about 50% of respondents being gun owners themselves.

A more honest interpretation would be that responsible gun owners have no qualms about sensible gun laws. Gun laws should regulate who has guns with the same intent as car drivers are regulated. Because not everyone should be behind the wheel of a vehicle, nor on a trigger.