Horrific. None of these words do full justice to the recent shooting and killing of 27 people in Connecticut. Most of the 27 were small children, their lives ended much too soon. As a father, I could not even begin to fathom why this happened, or why anyone would commit such a heinous act.
When I first heard of this story, my heart sank to hear of yet "another" mass shooting; they have gotten to be that common and that frequent. And, as before, those who would bring up the issue of gun control will be decried by those who give the same ludicrous and selfish arguments:
"We shouldn't politicize a tragedy."
"Guns don't kill people; people kill people. Killers will always find a way."
"If we ban some kinds of guns, where will it stop?"
"If more people had guns, they could stop the killers themselves."
All I can say to those who hold the Second Amendment so dear is this: if you lost your child to a deranged gunman, would you still fight for the right of everyone to possess a dangerous weapon, or would you do everything in your power to make sure that it never happened to anyone else?
I weep for the children who will never experience the joys of a full life.
I weep for the parents who never realized that they would lose their children so unexpectedly.
I weep for the people who will go through another tragedy like this, knowing that our society will most likely do nothing to prevent it from happening again.
I weep for a society that is so in love with guns that it cannot bring itself to stop such needless tragedies.
Kesavan Srinivasan, Hudson
I weep b/c we will not institute the ONLY means that has been shown to stop mass shootings (school or otherwise). We will not allow faculty and staff the ability to defend their lives and those lives they are responsible for.
Politicians surround themselves with guns, some even have their own conceal carry permits (but say we shouldn't?), banks protect their money with armed guards and armored vehicles, yet we force legal, law abiding citizens to give up their rights to self-defense. And leave our most precious children defenseless.
It boils down to this: There is no valid reason anyone can advance that can force me to relinquish my right to defend myself, nor my right to own the constitutionally-protected means to do so. The Court has held that firearms in common use that bear some reasonable relationship to militia duty enjoy constitutional protection.
So, quit nagging and whining. The "debate" is non-existent, since no conclusion that would support violating rights that are inviolable is acceptable.