On The Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting & The Gun Violence Epidemic In America


Yesterday was a pretty difficult day for me. I woke up to the news that a “school shooting” had taken place on the East Coast and, to my eventual horror, I kind of just shrugged it off because the initial reports were that 2 adults were shot. At the time, I didn’t know if the adults were killed or not, I just thought How sad and went about the start of my day. I work with the morning news on TV so that I can keep up with important news as I spend my day blogging about the fun gossipy stuff. When the reports from Connecticut made it clear that children were shot and killed, my blasé attitude toward the shooting changed dramatically. We live in a world where there is so much violence that I easily discounted news of “2 adults shot” and only really took notice when the story turned into 14-18 elementary school children where killed by gunfire. The saddest part of all is that not even the unfathomable tragedy of 20 kindergarten children shot and killed will likely do anything to force real gun control change to happen in this country that blindly adheres to the extremely outdated language of the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution. Our “God-given” right to bear arms is blinding us to a rampant cancer that is drowning our country in blood.

As you may know, the details out of Newtown, CT changed dramatically as the day unfolded. Today, a day later, we still don’t know the full story. It was believed that the shooter, Adam Lanza, shot and killed his mother Nancy Lanza inside her kindergarten classroom along with 20 kindergarten children. Today we are hearing that that is not what happened. Nancy Lanza, some are reporting, was NOT a teacher at the school and that she was murdered by her son in the Newtown, CT home they shared. It’s possible that Nancy Lanza was a substitute teacher but, thus far, the only confirmed connection to the school is that Adam Lanza was a former student:

A man killed his mother at their home and then opened fire Friday inside an elementary school, massacring 26 people, including 20 children, as youngsters cowered in fear to the sound of gunshots reverberating through the building and screams echoing over the intercom. The 20-year-old killer, carrying at least two handguns, committed suicide at the school, bringing the death toll to 28, authorities said … At least one parent said Lanza’s mother was a substitute teacher there. But her name did not appear on a staff list. And the law enforcement official said investigators were unable to establish any connection so far between her and the school.

As for Lanza’s father, who was originally reported as murdered in his home in NJ, it turns out that he is alive and well … as is older brother Ryan Lanza, who was originally reported as the shooter:

The father and older brother of the gunman who was blamed for the Connecticut school shooting were being questioned by authorities but are not suspects … His unidentified father, who lives in New York City, and his older brother, Ryan, 24, of Hoboken, N.J., are “in shock” … They were questioned by the FBI in the Hoboken police station but “are not suspects, they have no involvement,” the source says … [the] parents were no longer together, the source says.

As for the shooter himself, he is now being described by people how knew him as “weird” “quiet” and “disturbed” but also “smart but shy”:

They talk of a boy who dressed smartly and worked hard, but who barely said a word during his time at school. Police are investigating whether he suffered from a personality disorder. Lanza was “obviously not well”, a relative told ABC News. He appears to have shunned the limelight. US media report that there was no photograph of him in his high school yearbook of 2010. “Camera shy” was the comment by his entry. He apparently had no Facebook page and his electronic footprint was minimal … A former classmate, Olivia DeVivo, told the New York Times: “I never saw him with anyone. I can’t even think of one person that was associated with him” … Adam Lanza’s elder brother, 24-year-old Ryan, had moved to Hoboken, New Jersey, after graduating from Quinnipiac University in Connecticut. He works for the accountants Ernst & Young. His friends described him as smart but shy.

The guns he used to kill yesterday were legally registered to his now dead mother, who has been described as a “gun enthusiast”:

Two pistols, a Glock and a Sig Sauer, were found inside the school. A .223-caliber rifle was found in the back of the car that Lanza drove to school. Lanza’s mother had four weapons legally registered, and his father had two. A Henry repeating rifle, an Enfield rifle and a shotgun were also recovered by police; it was not clear where they were found.

Before yesterday’s shooting, Lanza is reported to have had an “altercation” at the school:

The gunman in the Newtown massacre had an “altercation” with four staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School the day before he killed 20 children, six adults and himself there, Connecticut and federal officials told NBC News Saturday. Three of the four staff members were killed Friday in one of the worst school shootings in U.S. history. The fourth staff member was not at school that day and is being interviewed by federal and state investigators, NBC News’ Pete Williams said … Lanza was heavily armed when he forced his way into the school Friday morning – after killing his mother at their home in Newtown. The officials said he had four handguns on him as he stormed the 600-student school and shot his victims – clustered in two classrooms – at close range. There was a rifle found in the car he drove to Sandy Hook. Previously, officials had said Lanza was armed with two pistols as he rampaged through the suburban school and that the weapons were legally purchased and registered to his mother, Nancy. At a Saturday briefing, Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance said officials were tracing every weapon connected to the shooter.

Sigh. As more details come out, the story gets more confusing. And, if you can believe it, there have already been two other shootings here in the US since yesterday morning’s massacre in Newtown. There was a shooting in Las Vegas, NV last night that left 2 people dead:

A man shot and fatally wounded a woman, then killed himself Friday night at the Excalibur hotel-casino on the Las Vegas Strip, sending frightened patrons fleeing. Las Vegas Police Lt. Ray Steiber said the shootings happened at about 8:30 p.m. near the high-rise hotel’s front entrance. Steiber said the man shot the woman, who was a vendor at the hotel’s concierge desk, and then turned the gun on himself. The man was found dead at the scene. The woman was transported to a local hospital, where she was pronounced dead.

This morning, a man opened fire inside a hospital in Alabama:

A shooting at a hospital in Alabama early Saturday has left one person dead and three injured. It happened at Saint Vincent’s Hospital in Birmingham. Police say a man shot two employees and a police officer on the fifth floor around 4 a-m. A second officer shot and killed the gunman.The three victims suffered non-life-threatening injuries. There’s no word on why the suspect opened fire.

And on and on … this kind of thing will continue in this country. As long as people are allowed easy access to guns, people will continue to open fire in malls, schools, hospitals, churches, restaurants, movie theaters, hotels and on and on and on. Gun advocates generally like to hide behind sayings like “guns don’t kill people” and they tout the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution as their Bible. They overwhelmingly believe the “right to bear arms” is a God-given right that allows them free and unfettered access to guns of varying sizes and power. When the US Constitution was written, the Founding Fathers of this nation intended for US citizens — newly freed from the tyranny of Britain — to be allowed access to firearms to protect themselves should that freedom be threatened in the future. The weapons they were talking about were muskets, rifles that could shoot 2 musket balls (max) before having to reload. They had no idea that semi automatic weapons would ever come into existence. If they did, I find it very hard to believe that they would trust the “public masses” to have unfettered access to that kind of weaponry. Think about it, they didn’t trust the public with the simple task of voting for the US President! They created the Electoral College to elect the president because they didn’t trust the public to do the right thing. Do you think they would trust the public with Uzi ownership?

And even if they did intend the public to be armed with semi-automatic weapons, who the fuck cares? Our nation has evolved over time. Our Founding Fathers used to believe that women were incapable of voting, that some people could be treated as property and something as simple as alcohol should be illegal. Over time, we as a Nation have decided that women should be allowed to vote, no person should ever be considered another man’s property and booze should be legal. When will our Nation wake up and stand up to organizations like the NRA and say enough is enough. We are tired of drowning in blood. We may have a right to bear arms but that right should be protected to the fullest extent possible in that only the most qualified people can own guns … and even then, they can only own certain kinds of guns. Will this solve all of our problems? No, violence among humans will never cease — NEVER. But reasonable gun control laws will make it much harder and much less likely for a 20 year old to walk into a kindergarten class and slaughter innocent children.

There will be a lot of talk about this gun control thing for a few days but, sadly, the talk will die down. The gun lobby will remain vigilant and no real change will take place. I hope I’m wrong but … I doubt it. Sadly. Until the next deadly massacre comes along to jolt us awake again, we’ll eventually forget about the sad victims in Newtown, CT.

But while people are talking, I think it’s a good idea that as many of us as possible join the conversation. Talk is meaningless without action … but we have to start somewhere. I suspect there will those people out there who disagree with me and that’s fine. I, personally, am tired of seeing our country soaked in the blood of innocent people. Hopefully those of you who are also tired of enduring this kind of violence will speak up … maybe do something … to effect change.

[Source, Source, Source, Source, Source, Source, Source]

No tags 33 Comments 0
  • Lauren xx

    I think discussing gun control is important, but people are so quick to jump to it. I think the bigger issue here is to make mental health care less of a social stigma and more accessible to people who truly need it. Sane people don’t open fire in an elementary school, a hospital, movie theater or a shopping mall.

    It is only when we as a nation address both of these issues seriously that these rampages will stop.

    • Jay Jay

      I agree with you. Both of these issues need to be discussed. The only thing is, if we made mental health care more accessible to these insane people, who’s to say that they would get the help. I think it’s much easier to control the way someone gets their hands on a gun, let alone weapons that fire hundreds of bullets in seconds, than to convince someone to get mental care.

    • Karen

      I totally agree that good, consistent, and continuing mental health care needs to be available to all people who need it, and that we as a society must destigmatize both mental illness and mental health care (i.e., not considering those who seek care to be weak).

      However, that is not nearly enough of a response. It is necessary but totally insufficient. Mental illness is equally distributed throughout the human population, but gun violence is not. But the level of gun violence we have in this country far exceeds that of all other countries to which we would ever want to compare ourselves. Even in this country, it is relatively recent.

      The role of guns in our society MUST be changed for this violence to stop.

    • Steph

      Karen, I would argue that the way the US health system is set up you have people who cannot access mental health care like they can in Canada, the UK, anywhere in Europe. The difference between the US and the rest of the world is their priorities.

  • Bristolj

    I know people will not like my response but there are more stupid people every year, that we need tighter gun control laws. I disagree with the old adage of guns dont kill people, really then what did the mental patient use?

  • Karen

    Very well said, Trent.

    I was reading a comment on another website (TPM) by a person who grew up in “gun culture”. He said a major part of the problem is that the nature of the gun culture in this country has changed. It used to be about hunting and now it’s about “self-defense” (in quotes because it is defense against imaginary threats). The excessive power of the guns and all of the tactical accoutrements go with that.

    The people who subscribe to that mentality should not be allowed to dictate the circumstances in which the rest of us have to live. They should not have that power.

    Reasonable people should agree on most aspects of gun control. We cannot let unreasonable people control our elected officials on this issue. (I don’t think we should let them control anyone on any issue, but I’m trying to stay on topic!)

  • Megan

    This shooting has really been my breaking point. I’ve always thought we’ve needed tougher gun control laws, but I didn’t do anything about it. Now I’m going to use my voice to do as much as I can. It’s getting ridiculous. Regular peoples voices can make a difference up against organizations like the NRA if we have enough people and if we’re loud enough. I’m also looking toward President Obama to be a voice in this. He was very emotional at the press conference yesterday, and I hope that turns into action. I would also urge people to email their state representatives. All the extreme gun enthusiasts will be making their voice heard in that way, so we also need to make sure they’re hearing our opinion.

  • Deb Hodgon

    I don’t understand your “right to bear arms”ideal. Why? Why do you need to carry guns? Soundsl like the days of the wild west, and really, why did they need to carry guns? I don’t know what your law entails at all. Do people need a licence to own guns as they do in Australia? Of course, this doesn’t stop people from owning them illegally and buying them through the black market, but you can’t even buy a slug gun without a licence here. It’s not a common thing to own a gun here unless, we just don’t count it as something we need to have in our homes. However people like my daughter who lives on a farm do have a rifle to kill snakes, injured cattle etc, not as a self-defense tool against another human. It all sounds so barbaric to me. I’m so saddened by these events. As I said yesterday, I”m our school administrator and the children’s safety is my upmost concern. I cannot imagine what I would do if something like this happened at my school.

    • @Deb Hodgon – “I don’t understand your “right to bear arms”ideal. Why? Why do you need to carry guns?”

      When the US was founded, we won independence from Britain. The Founders of this nation didn’t believe that that freedom would last (Washingon, our first president, believed the US would fall apart after 20 years). In order to feel protected, they clearly laid out the express right for citizens to bear arms to protect themselves from foreign invaders (Britain) and even the government itself (we had fought for freedom from a king, some feared a president would turn out like a king). It’s an outdated and old fashioned ideal that gun lovers in this country look to as the word of god.

    • Deb Hodgon

      To me, it just feels like violence fighting violence. I understand that people should have a right to protect themselves, family and property, but there has to be a better answer than shooting. Of course, in an ideal world there would be no reason to have to have protection. I suppose because owning guns and having them in households is not a common occurrence down here that I find it strange. I don’t know where the gun came from for this tragedy, whether it was already in the home or whether he purchased it. If he bought it, why wouldn’t he have to follow a strict criteria including owning a licence and undergoing a mental health check before it was sold to him. Because you have a right to bear arms, I suspect there is no such checks. Which ever way it goes, doesn’t change the fact that perhaps tighter laws are needed. I’m not naive enough to believe that if someone wants to buy a gun they can get one illegally, but there might be less incidences such as this if guns and other weapons were harder to acquire. Just my 5c worth.

    • Kathryn

      As a fellow Australian I understand where your coming from Deb. After the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 most guns were banned in Oz and if you do want to own a gun here you have to abide by very strict laws. Our government managed to change laws and make our country a safer place to live, partly because of the overwhelming support from the Australian people.

    • Kathryn

      Here’s an example of statistics regarding gun related violence, before and after the guns law change in Australia in 1996.
      It can be done.

  • Mel

    Thank you for this, Trent. As for the whole “guns don’t kill people; people kill people” thing – well, it’s absolutely right, but it’s incomplete. Guns don’t kill people, but people kill people WITH GUNS. Do people kill people with other weapons? Absolutely, which is one of the many reasons that mental health care needs to be made a priority. If someone is angry or in pain, and wants that feeling to end, they have a choice: they can get therapy, or they can get a gun, and as of today, it’s easier for many of those people to get a gun, whether they use it on themselves or on others. There are lots of things that should have come out of every previous mass shooting, and that need to come out of this one, but I really think the two most important are that it needs to be much harder to get hold of a gun, and much easier to get mental health care.

  • Becca

    In significant parts of the rest of the world NOT having a gun is considered being safe…

  • Kara

    I completely agree with Lauren xx up there. Mental health care needs to be more readily available and less stigmatized so that people who do things like this, who are obviously unwell, can get the continued help they need to be happy and productive members of society. In addition to gun control. Both issues are vitally important.

  • Tiffany

    I like the 2nd amendment, but I do agree that something does need to change about the current gun control laws, not necessarily that the laws need to be tougher but obviously the application to get a gun is… out of date. I mean, if there were tougher laws, how much of the problem would actually be solved? In my opinion, I don’t think tougher gun control laws will really make that big of a difference. I think that if gun control laws were re-evaluated and made it tougher to legally get a gun it would only make it easier for people to get guns illegally. Look at when they made alcohol illegal, were any of the problems actually solved? Nope, in fact the problems got worse. And look at drugs, even though they’re illegal they’re so easy to get. Even the legal drugs such as prescription pain killers are easy to find and get ahold of. When someone is mentally unstable and they want to harm someone, they’re going to harm them with whatever they can get their hands on. I mean, take what happened in China yesterday. A 36 year old man went to a primary school and injured 22 children and an adult with a knife.As far as I’ve heard, no one in the China incident was killed, but it was just a copycat from what happened in China in 2010, where there were multiple knife attacks at different elementary schools and many children were killed because of a knife. And let’s just say that there were tougher gun control laws and someone who was mentally unstable couldn’t get a gun legally or illegally, do you really think that they’d just say “oh well I guess I can’t do something about my uncontrollable rage”? I don’t think so, I think they’d just find another tool to hurt and kill people with. Maybe it’d be a knife, or maybe it’d be a bomb. I think it’s easy for people to make a bomb, I mean I’m sure there are instructions somewhere on the internet (I wouldn’t know because I’ve never looked).

    And about making mental health care more easily available, yes that would help. Actually, it would help a lot. I think that would be a much better solution than to make gun laws tougher. But if you make it cheaper and easier, would they get the same care? Look at regular health care, if you have good insurance you get good care, if you don’t have good insurance you don’t get good care, if you don’t have insurance at all you don’t get any care. You would have to find pyscologists that would be willing to work for less but provide the same care. And sadly, I don’t think that would happen because I don’t think there are enough people in the world who are not that greedy.

    • fmx

      You would think that health care is a given right on the list of top priorities for Americans, but nope, it’s guns.

    • Mel

      Re: Mental health care – There are alternatives to making psychologists (or medical doctors) work for less in order to provide care for the less wealthy. This isn’t the time or place for the private vs. public healthcare debate, but if I were given a choice between paying a bit extra in tax to cover psychiatric treatment for a troubled kid, and seeing that kid bring a gun to an elementary school, I know which I’d choose. Of course, it’s not just about funding – if someone doesn’t seek help, and no one around them notices that they need help, then the best system in the world won’t prevent anything. But once someone’s identified as needing treatment, that treatment needs to be available.

      As for guns, no one’s saying that there won’t still be illegally-obtained guns out there. But countries with tougher gun control actually don’t have Prohibition-like issues with guns. They just have fewer guns, after amnesties and turn-in programs to get as many weapons off the street as possible. Fewer guns in the country means that it’s harder to get one, legally or illegally. It doesn’t mean there’s no gun crime, but, statistically, it happens at a much lower rate. It doesn’t mean there are no mass stabbings or bombings, which is where the mental health care comes in. A newly-formed country that’s just fought its way out of colonialism has far different self-defense and militia needs than a 21st-century superpower, and as far as I’m concerned, the 2nd amendment belongs in the 18th century.

    • Steph

      You cannot pay psychologists less, psychologists are already well underpaid as it is (the average pay for a psychologist in the US is around $6-70K- this is for 11 years of university training PLUS internship)!
      In Canada they have started to replace psychologists with less trained social workers and we are starting to see the negative effect that is having on the mental health system. I think this is the exact time we need to bring up private vs public heath care. The difference between the US and the rest of the world does not stop at gun laws.

    • tessa

      i think it’s unfair to suggest that psychologists who won’t work for less to solve the problem are greedy. as a mental health professional we’re working hard already, and do a certain amount of pro bono work when a patient needs help and can’t afford it, but we also have to pay our bills and support our families. the bottom line is access to mental health and reducing the stigmatization of seeking mental health services is key, but in isolation it’s not enough. not everyone will seek help, and in the mean time, do we allow weapons to be so easily accessed? do we leave dangerous things in the reach of our children or do we remove the temptation all together??

  • CB

    Yesterday, when all of this absolute horror was unfolding, the no. 1 trending topic on Twitter was #prayfornewtown. That’s lovely, but why the heck wasn’t #guncontrol trending? America needs to wake up, stop talking about it and get ANGRY. Innocent adults, and now 20 little children, have been allowed to be killed because of the ridiculous laws allowing people easy access to guns. If America can’t protect its kids then what is the point of the constitution? What happened yesterday was the ultimate nightmare. Such a huge and pointless waste of human life. What I would like to see is that all those little angels who died in terror and pain didn’t die for nothing. Let this be the event that is the catalyst for change to America’s gun laws. I am a mother, I do not live in America, but I am sick to my stomach over this. There is so much I love about you America – but change your gun laws.

  • Matthew

    I completely agree with Trent here. The argument that we need access to guns to defend ourselves just does not hold up.

    1. Most people CAN’T carry a gun on their person for the duration of a regular day. So even if you do legally purchase and own a firearm, how are you going to defend yourself with it if you don’t have it on you? You can’t take it to work. It’s most likely going to stay at home, hopefully in a secured location where you can’t use it to defend yourself for 50% of the random things that can happen to you while out and about.

    2. The only time a gun “might” come in handy, is if you were somehow assaulted in your home. But even then, if armed robbers came into my home, the last thing I want the gunmen to see is me with a gun in my hand. Then bullets will fly and most likely there will be a fatality. How is that safe?

    3. But let’s say you get the jump on them. Let’s say the alarm goes off and you wake up. What’s going to go happen? You’re going to spring out of bed, run past little Sally’s room, run past Johnny’s room, and into the den, where you have this gun locked up tight so the kids can’t get to it. So you have to find the key, and when you unlock the cabinet, you have to take the safety off. Then what? Well you are going drop and roll into cover, and then do a double spin and pow pow, take down the first one. Then you are going to stealth behind the second one for the win? REALLY? Is that how it’s going to go down? Cause I never hear it like the news. I only hear about the dad who ended up shooting his son who he thought was an intruder.

    4. The idea that this gun makes you safer is only in your head. After all, you are the only one who knows you have a gun in the house.

    So I think the argument that we need guns to defend ourselves is quite bogus.

  • fmx

    Guns should not be a given right in the same way nuclear bombs are not my given right or active army tanks are not my given right.

  • Alania

    whether you believe that guns should be your right or not, Adam was not the person who had legal rights to the weapons anyway….so the gun law issue is pretty irrelevant to me in this specific case. if someone is this crazy, he/she can find a way to get their point across. i’m thinking by the latest info that the mother knew something was wrong w/ adam…and she definitely should’t have enabled those guns to be so accessible to him….but trying to change gun laws – unless it is to completely get rid of them all together, i don’t think is going to make a difference

    • Matthew

      I disagree, Alania. The debate over gun control is very applicable to this particular case. The shooter tried to purchase a firearm legally and was not able to. Instead of going through the hoops required for the license, he went and got his mom’s.

      I think you are right that someone who wants to commit an act of violence will try to find a way to do so, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to limit the amount of guns out there, especially when harsher gun laws have been proven to lower the rate of gun related deaths in countries such as Australia and England.

  • Stephanie

    I completely agree, Trent. As an Australian, I love America, I would love to live there, but it’s times like this that make me glad that I don’t, because the notion of a ‘God-given right to bear arms’ is absurd, outdated and completely irrational.
    I actually have a celebrity gossip blog of my own, and although I normally steer clear of talking about ‘real’ issues, I couldn’t help but address this because from my point of view as an outsider observing this gun culture and the mentality that goes along with it, it’s devastating and baffling to me that America continues to allow this to happen, instead of standing up for the victims of these senseless tragedies that so easily could have been prevented. I would love it if you read my take on the situation at http://popcultureperversion.com/2012/12/15/lets-take-a-break-from-our-regular-celebrity-chit-chat-to-talk-about-sandy-hook-for-a-hot-minute-oh-and-read-what-the-celebs-are-saying-about-it/

    • Shannon

      Stephanie, thanks for sharing this. So great to read about the Aussie way, and how effective it has been… and how ridiculously easy it would be for Americans to adopt a similar methodology. It wouldn’t solve ALL, but it would be a great first step.

      And I loved your opening! ‘this isn’t going to be the kind of post where I get all wound up about something silly and start stringing swear words together for maximum shock value.’ LMAO! I love Jezebel… but sometimes, yeah. It’s a bit much. Thanks again for sharing this.

    • Stephanie

      Hi Shannon,

      Thanks for reading my post, I’ve been an avid reader of PITNB for so long I can’t even remember, but I’m a huge fan of you and Trent and this blog played a big role in me starting my own blog.

      I love Jezebel as well but I was actually talking about my own regular blog posts haha, as I tend to go in for over-the-top dramatics. But you know, there’s a time and a place and talking about such a serious matter isn’t that time.

      I read in the paper today that while the US has had 10,300 gun related deaths this year, while Australia has had 31. It truly baffles the mind to think about how many people’s deaths could have been prevented with the introduction of gun laws.

      The mental health care argument is an interesting one, too, though, and wasn’t one that I considered until now because I guess I’m so accustomed to Australia’s health care system that I kind of forget just how different it is over there because it seems so strange to me just how much you guys have to pay for when it comes to healthcare.

      Thanks so much for the shout out, as well. I really appreciate it! I guess all we can do now is wait to see if anything happens as a result of this, and I hope and pray that it does so that some good can come from this senseless tragedy.

  • Just me

    This scumbag didn’t own any legal weapons. He killed his mother to obtain the weapons SHE owned legally. I do believe in the right to bear arms, and unfortunately, no matter what gun control laws the government puts in place, criminals, or sickos who really want to, will find a way to gain access to weapons. It’s a conundrum with no easy solution. How do we allow honest, upright people to possess firearms (whether they be for hunting or personal protection) without giving access to those people who want use those weapons to go out and harm innocents, especially when those people are probably willing to go to illegal lengths to obtain them? For the time being, can’t we just focus on mourning the unnecessary loss of 26 innocent lives?

  • Jen

    Dear Trent,

    I have followed your blog for years and years. I love the fact that we both attended OU and that was one of the main reasons I started reading your blog. I really enjoy how open you are about your life and your experiences and that is why I have kept coming back everyday for a read. I’m afraid today will be the last day I will read it.

    I appreciate that it is your right (as it is your blog) to opine about whatever it is you would like. I get it.

    “Gun advocates like to hide behind sayings like “guns don’t kill people” and they tout the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution as their Bible. They believe the “right to bear arms” is a God-given right that allows them free and unfettered access to guns of varying sizes and power.”

    I am one of these “they” you speak of. I am a gun advocate. I don’t tout the 2nd Amendment as my bible. I don’t believe it is a God-given right. I find it hard to believe that you, as a non-gun advocate can really tell me what I believe. We are not all the same. Remember that there are thousands of people who read your blog, and not all of them agree with you on all your views. Up until today, I always felt that you were inclusive in your beliefs, and didn’t expect everyone to agree with you and respected them just the same. After this post, I don’t see that at all. These are inflammatory, and exclusionary statements that have completely alienated this reader.

    It’s been fun.

  • Reno

    Trey, I may have to steal your line that you stole from G. Gordon Liddy. I’m ambivalent about this pposored law. On one hand, I don’t like government stepping in as a general matter to restrict communications. On the other hand, it’s absolutely none of the doctor’s business whether you have firearms in your house, and entirely irrelevant to treating your kid’s strep throat. The interesting thing, though, is that the medical profession is highly regulated at the state and federal levels anyway, and there are all manners of things you can’t say or do with regard to patient care. It’s interesting that people are squealing about this one, when the regulation of doctors and their patient interactions is nothing new.

  • elizag33

    Very interesting discussion here, thank you. I was moved to compose this slam-style piece and would like to share it here. Hope that’s ok: http://ekg3.com/blog/2013/01/1402/