Skip to main content

View Diary: National Review: Newtown Is The Price We Pay For Our Rights (236 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Sorry, but you're a sick fuck: (4+ / 0-)
    So, sadly, yes: The Second Amendment DOES, at times, sadly, profoundly sadly, demand the sacrifice of our children. And it is a sad day indeed when that price is paid, but it does not in any way detract from the sacredness of this charter.
    If you actually believe this, then you need your head examined.

    "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

    by FogCityJohn on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 11:01:14 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Give me liberty (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DarthMeow504

      "Give me liberty or give me death."

      Is this not a sacred axiom of our nation's tradition?

      I value human life, cherish life, but the bigger picture is our nation's principle of freedom from tyrrany. This union was formed as a revolt against tyrrany. People seem to forget the danger of this, which is strange when we've seen even in our age the abuse of power by our government. We must be vigilant against this.

      You have resorted to immature name calling, when all I am doing is counseling prudence and perspective, in response to this tragedy. I am not the enemy here, so attacking me with name calling wont make this world a safer place and it won't bring those children back, or heal the scars upon those who survived this. We need to see within this tragedy the deeper lesson. Someone had signs that this sick boy needed help. That is where the focus must be, namely, providing a more nurturing caring society, not blaming the weapon. I am not saying that there cannot or should not be gun laws about proper safe keeping of guns, or training, or background checks, etc ... I would support those laws.... I am just saying that there will always be some abuse, and tragedies happen.... this is a sad fact of life. And yes, sometimes the life that is paid for freedom is children. The government has also taken the life of innocent children, in their wars, so why would you trust them fully? I don't, not fully at least.

      •  They can't handle the facts (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TheFacts101

        Ben Franklin said "Those who would trade essential liberty for imaginary security deserve neither".

        And it is imaginary. No "sane and sensible" gun restriction will keep a psychopath from getting their hands on a stolen gun. People keep missing the fact that it was ALREADY ILLEGAL for this murdering scumbag to own a gun. He had to steal them. No additional laws would have stopped him.

        As to a total gun ban, if you somehow manage to ram that through and demolish the second amendment along the way, welcome to the new prohibition. The "War on Guns". Which will work exactly as well as alcohol Prohibition did or the War on Drugs does.

        Criminalizing innocent people is not the answer.

        "Is there anybody listening? Is there anyone who sees what's going on? Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling. Think for yourself, and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet." --Geoff Tate, Queensryche

        by DarthMeow504 on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 03:37:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sadly, this is true. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DarthMeow504

          Thank you for standing up and speaking these hard truths and keeping a level head in these sorrow filled days. I do support certain reasonable gun control laws, I merely wish to prevail upon people to keep perspective and remember that there is a reason that our founding fathers enacted the 2nd Amendment, namely, as I keep stressing, because they felt, as I feel, as you feel, as we all I believe should feel, that a prudent distrust of governing bodies is wise. I do not feel we shouldn't distrust the government for SINGLE PAYER, or taxing the wealthy to investment in our nation, or any of the other social welfare programs, etc .... but to any who counsel banning all weapons, I want to counsel a broader perspective that tyranny is always one generation away, as i think Reagan, said, not that I am a fan of Reagan. These are dangerous times on many fronts. I rejoice at Obama's elections and I do trust Obama implicitly, but he is but one man, and it was not so long ago that Bush and Cheney were in power and everyone should remember how untrustworthy they were. And, the truth is, no despot would ever attempt a tyranny with an armed populace. Never happen. And it's not about any notion of "superior power" or "comparative fire power" because obviously the government has massive forces, it's about deterrence. 

          These are sad days. I know. But calling fellow liberals insulting names just because we voice hard truths is not the answer. The only sick fuck in this situation is the kid who killed the children and teachers, not me. I've been called several names these past few days for voicing the need for prudent perspective. 

          •  By all means. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FogCityJohn

            Post a diary and explain the facts of how the Second Amendment requires the spilling of the blood of 20 children. I'm anxious to be educated from your superior understanding of the world.

            "The marriage fight is over when we say it's over, and it's over when we win."—Dan Savage

            by Scott Wooledge on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 10:57:05 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Straw Man (0+ / 0-)

              A psychopath commits a horrible crime with stolen weapons, and you want to blame anyone and anything else but him. You want to pretend "guns" are at fault, or "gun rights" or "gun activists" when NONE of these are material to the case.

              How will gun laws prevent someone from acquiring illegal weapons? How would that have changed this case at all? What happened here is clear:

              1) Murdering psychopath illegally acquires (in this case, stole) weapons he was not legally allowed to possess or own,

              and

              2) commits a horrifying, brutal crime with said illegal weapons.

              How would more gun laws have made a difference? What he did was already against the law. He broke the law. He didn't give a flying rat's ass about the law.

              Nothing "requires" the death of children. It happened because a psychopathic murderer decided to commit an awful crime and no one was able to prevent it before it was too late. Period. THAT is why it happened, nothing else. It wasn't because guns exist, it wasn't because law-abiding citizens have the right to own them, it was because a determined criminal got his hands on weapons he was not supposed to have and committed a series of crimes. Getting the guns was itself one of his crimes.

              Understand this? I am not responsible, the 2nd Amendment is not responsible, legal and responsible gun owners are not responsible. This murdering psychopath and he alone are responsible. He committed crimes with illegal weapons, everything he did was already illegal. There is no loophole to close here.

              Attacking legal, law-abiding gun owners for this single lunatic's crime is the same as attacking Iraq over 9/11. You've got the wrong target, there, cowboy. Ready, fire, aim!

              "Is there anybody listening? Is there anyone who sees what's going on? Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling. Think for yourself, and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet." --Geoff Tate, Queensryche

              by DarthMeow504 on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 01:41:48 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  your understanding of the second amendment (0+ / 0-)

                is that it allows you the right to completely unfettered access to any and all weapons of your choosing and anything less is a violation of your constitutional rights.

                I disagree.

                "The marriage fight is over when we say it's over, and it's over when we win."—Dan Savage

                by Scott Wooledge on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 02:12:07 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  You can have your own death . . . (3+ / 0-)

        if you so desire.  But you have no right to make that decision for a bunch of first graders.  As the Supreme Court has said before, the Constitution is not a suicide pact, and there is no reason we need to tolerate this kind of carnage.

        So if you think that you have to pay the price of your "freedom" in human lives, then I will thank you to ensure that those lives are yours or your family's.  Please do not ask a bunch of innocent children in Newtown to pay that price for you.

        "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

        by FogCityJohn on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 10:24:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  A domestic assault rifle (3+ / 0-)

        and a magazine of 30 bullet ≠ Liberty.

        John's right. Only a sick fuck could type this:

        So, sadly, yes: The Second Amendment DOES, at times, sadly, profoundly sadly, demand the sacrifice of our children.

        "The marriage fight is over when we say it's over, and it's over when we win."—Dan Savage

        by Scott Wooledge on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 10:33:59 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I have been a huge fan of your diaries, Scott, (0+ / 0-)

          for almost two years, and so I am very sorry you feel that way about my comment. And as a fan, I take your words especially to heart. Look, I do appreciate the horror of these events, and in response to that horror, I understand that you want to lash out, but I am not the enemy. Really, I am not.

          FACT: Even if this were a six bullet pistol/revolver, children would have died.

          FACT: If this were a Glock 17, holding 17 rounds, children would have died.

          Where do you draw the line?

          Are you advocating for a ban on all fire arms, which they have in the UK, because that is what I am hearing from some people on this site, and further, when people quote statistics from the UK, this is implied. And that is what I am advocating against, not the question of whether you support assault rifles or not, or background checks to prevent known criminals from purchasing fire arms, which I do support. The point is, if we support, as a nation, the Right to Bear Arms, as the founding fathers intended, then with this right, there is a certain degree of danger, but that danger is the price we pay for the Right to Bear Arms. And that is why the real discussion, for me, is centered around the purpose and intent of the founding Fathers for including the Right to Bear Arms in the US Constitution, namely, a protection against tyranny. Now, if you do not believe that a government, ANY government, can become a tyranny, then we have gotten to the heart of where you and I differ in opinion. But, if you agree that tyranny is possible, then the Right to Bear Arms is necessary, as a prudent deterrent, because no despot would attempt a tyranny against an armed populace, whether the government had superior fire power or not.

          FACT: In the military when dealing with national defense, one must make hard decisions and accept the harsh consequences of those decisions, and sometimes the casualties are innocent civilians ....and sometimes children.

          Do you think I am happy about that? Hell the fuck no!

          The people who make those decisions are not "sick fucks" for accepting this harsh reality with brutal candor. And sometimes that candor might appear cold-hearted, but it is not. I assure you. But there is, at times, a certain spirit of necessary detachment, which is necessary in order to make those hard decisions..... to save lives and prevent tyranny.

          Now, unless you want to hide your head in the sand and make believe that the world is a perfect place and that there are no dangers or no possible tragedies, you might want to rethink your harsh characterization of my words and consider that maybe, just maybe, there is wisdom in my perspective. I am not the enemy.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site