Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

thoughtful piece on Newtown in USAToday

Recommended Posts

I found this oped to be very reasonable. It was factual without being overly politcal. I found the link for it on LewRockwell.com


Column: Reflections on Newtown


By Glenn Harlen Reynolds


A week after an American tragedy, what have we learned?


1. When Twenty Minutes Is Forever. According to the CNN timeline for the Sandy Hook tragedy, "Police and other first responders arrived on scene about 20 minutes after the first calls." Twenty minutes. Five minutes is forever when violence is underway, but 20 minutes -- a third of an hour -- means that the "first responders" aren't likely to do much more than clean up the mess.

This has led to calls -- in Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, St. Louis -- for armed officers or staff at schools. Some object. But we have people with guns protecting airports, hospitals and politicians. And leading anti-gun crusaders like New York's billionaire Mayor Mike Bloomberg and press lord Rupert Murdoch are protected by armed security teams that could probably topple some third-world governments. Why are our children less worthy of protection?

Then there are our homes. If police took twenty minutes to respond at a school, how likely are they to get to your house in time? For those of us without "security teams," the answer isn't reassuring.


2. Is Hate A Liberal Value? A 20-year-old lunatic stole some guns and killed people. Who's to blame? According to a lot of our supposedly rational and tolerant opinion leaders, it's . . . the NRA, a civil-rights organization whose only crime was to oppose laws banning guns. (Ironically, it wasn't even successful in Connecticut, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation.)

The hatred was intense. One Rhode Island professor issued a call -- later deleted -- for NRA head Wayne LaPierre's "head on a stick." People like author Joyce Carol Oates and actress Marg Helgenberger wished for NRA members to be shot. So did Texas Democratic Party official John Cobarruvias, who also called the NRA a "terrorist organization," and Texas Republican congressman Louis Gohmert a "terror baby."

Nor were reporters, who are supposed to be neutral, much better. As The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg commented, "Reporters on my Twitter feed seem to hate the NRA more than anything else, ever. "

Calling people murderers and wishing them to be shot sits oddly with claims to be against violence. The NRA -- like the ACLU, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers or Planned Parenthood -- exists to advocate policies its members want. It's free speech. The group-hate directed at the NRA is ugly and says ugly things about those consumed by it.


3. We Don't Deal Well With Crazy People. Clayton Cramer makes this point in his recent book on the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill, but the evidence is all around us. Parents of mentally-ill adults have a terrible time. Many mentally ill -- especially men -- wind up in jails, which have basically taken over from the old state mental hospitals, now shut down. We need to look at this again.


4. Things Aren't Really That Bad.Gun ownership is up, but crime is down. In general, crime in the United States has been declining for two decades. That's good news and shouldn't be lost in all the hype.


5. The War on Drugs. The drug war, according to many experts such as Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron, is a major driver of violence in America. When you leave out suicides (which make up more than half of gun deaths) most actual murders in this country are criminals killing other criminals. It's been that way for years. Get rid of the war on drugs, legalize at least "soft drugs" like marijuana, and you'll have less of that. As The Atlantic noted this week, the single best anti-gun-death policy would be ending the drug war. It would save money, too, at a time when the government is broke.

Ah, yes, the government is broke. And nobody seems to have a plan to deal with it. No wonder they'd rather have us talking about gun control.


original piece; http://www.usatoday....ctions/1787477/


lewrockwell.com piece; http://lewrockwell.c...on-newtown.html


this is one of the more rational pieces I've seen



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Posts

    • How about buy it or build it anyway and enjoy it?
    • When you post a question, you wait for an answer. Eleven minutes is not long to wait. A full day made you look like a troll.
    • Please don't mind the negative comments.  We are a group that are constantly under attack and any new poster is met with a level of suspicion.  Welcome to our board!  Stick around and get to know us better....You won't regret it!  Some FFL dealers responded to you that it is legal for your parents to gift you a gun without being able to take possession. The general consensus is it would be much easier for you to pick out a gun in California and have your parents pay for it or reimburse you.  Good luck and you have very nice parents!
    • Wow, I didn't expect this would start such a paranoid flame war. Just had a question and I figured this forum would be the best place to ask it on. Just to put some fears to rest, I am a legal gun owner in "Commiefornia" (we do exist). My parents simply wanted to get me a special gift as a surprise for my birthday later this year, but I wanted to make sure they wouldn't get themselves in trouble or anything. Thanks to everyone who offered some much needed legal advice. I'll let them know about getting me a gift card as an option instead if they don't want to deal with the hassle as well. Thanks for your time!
    • Lets go through the whole thing:   2C 39:1 w (5) A part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault firearm, or any combination of parts from which an assault firearm may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person. "A part of combination of parts" First per TITLE 13. LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY CHAPTER 54. FIREARMS AND WEAPONS you are in possession of 1) "Rifle" means any firearm designed to be fired from the shoulder and using the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger. 2) "Firearm or firearms" means any handgun, rifle, shotgun, machine gun, assault firearm, automatic or semi-automati crifle, or any gun, device or instrument in the nature of a weapon from which may be fired or ejected any solid projectile,ball, slug, pellet, missile or bullet, or any gas, vapor or other noxious thing, by means of a cartridge or shell or by the action of an explosive or the igniting of flammable or explosive substances. It shall also include, without limitation, any firearm which is in the nature of an air gun, spring gun or pistol or other weapon of a similar nature in which the propelling force is a spring, elastic band, carbon dioxide, compressed or other gas, or vapor, air or compressed air, or is ignited by compressed air, and ejecting a bullet or missile smaller than three-eighths of an inch in diameter, with sufficient force to injure a person   So right there we could stop. Because you aren't in possession of parts. Now in Title 13 they do not define "parts" or "readily assembled" --> That is up to the interpretation of intent and opinion letters. However they define "manufacturer" and they include a lot about parts in there:   "Manufacturer" means any person who receives or obtains raw materials or parts and processes them into firearms or finished parts of firearms, except a person who exclusively processes grips, stocks, and other nonmetal parts of firearms.The term does not include a person who repairs existing firearms or receives new and raw materials or parts solely for the repair of existing firearms.
  • Create New...