This morning as I was getting ready for work, a horror was beginning to play out in the small town of Newtown, Connecticut. 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot his mother and then went to Sandy Hook Elementary School where she taught and murdered 26 innocent people – including 20 children.

I have seen no shortage of hurt, sick and dying children in my profession. The one thing I have thankfully never had to see is a child dying of a gunshot wound. Contrary to what gun control advocates would tell you, small children don’t die of GSW’s very often. I run on child drownings several times a year, but in six years I have yet to run on a single child killed by a gun.

Unfortunately the statistics mattered none today. It almost seems as if Lanza was bent on killing mostly children. Unsurprisingly we don’t know the motive. In less than 24 hours, though, what innocence we had left has been shattered by a terrifying monstrosity that we never would have imagined in our worst nightmares. Tonight, the parents of 20 young children are sitting in shock. They know their children aren’t coming home, but they have not yet been officially told. The investigation has barely begun.

I had resolved this morning that I would not write about this so soon, but it cannot be helped. News was still fresh when some in the media began going after those who have been affected by mass shootings in the past. Some urged caution in how we react, but the media was really after statements from those who now advocate gun control. Several have angrily said that it’s the availability of guns in America that makes these tragedies possible.

Has anyone ever wondered why all of the mass shootings that happen here in the US always take place in so-called “gun-free” zones, places like schools that have strict zero-tolerance policies? Shooters go to those areas because they can inflict maximum casualties and nobody will fight back – because they can’t. Paducah. Jonesboro. Littleton. Aurora. The Oregon mall shooting just a couple of days ago – and now, Newtown. Malls and movie theaters in states where open carry is allowed almost always post signs telling patrons not to bring their legally-owned weapons inside, which is their right; the only problem is that the bad guys do not care about the rules any more than they care about the law. Murder is illegal, but they still commit it. We’ve made heroin, cocaine and methamphetamines illegal (among many drugs) but people still abuse those substances at rates that are unbelievable. I fail to understand how anyone believes that making guns illegal is going to solve the problem.

I’m not a parent, but I am an aunt. When I see things like this my mind goes into overdrive. I can’t even comprehend what my reaction would be if I were this powerless. I’ll tell you this, if some thug threatened any child (especially one in my family) in my presence, he would not survive the experience. If I’m watching those kids and someone breaks into the house, there will be no question nor any hesitation – I will make sure that person can never harm them again. We should be absolutely furious with anyone who dares to try to do harm to our kids. We should not be begging or pleading. We should be ready to do fatal damage to anyone who tries to harm or kill a child in our care.

Instead, we have gun-free zones. We want everyone to FEEL safe. I almost never go to the movies and avoid malls like the zombie apocalypse because I would be a sitting duck in those places. While I can understand some victims wanting to have a “discussion” about guns in America, I would rather they look hard at how we treat criminals and those who would become criminals. We’re so willing to become violent over politics, but we’re not willing to defend ourselves? How did we become a nation of people who would rather leave the most defenseless among us completely helpless in the face of evil?

Stop trying to make sense of this. There is no sanity involved. There is nothing even remotely normal about a 20-year-old gunning down a room full of kindergarteners, and trying to normalize it is just as insane as the act itself. One or two armed teachers could have stopped this before it happened. A gun could have saved lives today. Instead, the bright lights of 26 pure souls were extinguished.

It’s a sin and a shame that we weren’t willing to do more.


8 thoughts on “Shame

  1. I could not possibly agree more, Mel. The Brady Campaign lauds Connecticut as having some of the most stringent gun control laws in the country, ranked 5 out of 50 states, right up there with New York. It was illegal for this 20-year-old to possess or carry a handgun in Connecticut. He could not legally buy ammunition. He had mental illness, evidently, and was perhaps prohibited from possessing a firearm on that basis. None of that stopped him, nor would it anyone who is literally hell-bent on destroying life. What had a chance of stopping him? Trained and prepared staff who are armed.

  2. Very well put.
    Chicago, D.C., L.A., they all have strict gun laws—and the nation’s highest rates of homicide. giving credence to the old saying, “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”

  3. Great post, genius! Should I remind you that after Port Arthur massacre (1996) Australia enacted one of the most strictest gun control in the world? And you know how many gun massacres have australians experienced? Zero! Yes: you have understood very well… ZERO! But what could I expect on a conservative blog…

  4. And a murder rate around 1 per 100.000 inhabitants, while USA is around 5 per 100.000… FIVE TIMES HIGHER… and this without counting all the unintentional homicides… wow… what a big surprise 😀

  5. And just how many violent crimes could have been avoided? How many homes have been invaded by thugs who know their victims won’t be armed and capable of stopping them? How many rapes and assaults have happened?

    It’s funny you mention Australia. Let’s talk about England. They banned civilian ownership of guns in 1997, just one year later after the Dunblane massacre. Remember the Cumbria shootings? Oh, yes…Derrick Bird killed 12 people throughout Cumbria. That guy rampaged throughout the city and wasn’t stopped until 12 were cold.

    Let’s talk about Norway, shall we? They have very strict gun laws. You have to go through a battery of tests to prove that you’re stable and responsible enough to own a firearm, and what you can do with that weapon is severely restricted. Anders Breivik first tried to buy guns in Prague, Germany and Seribia. He wanted a weapon useful for his purpose and he couldn’t legally obtain it in Norway. He eventually settled for less than what he wanted and went to A YOUTH CAMP WHERE ALL WEAPONS WERE PROHIBITED to carry out mass murder.

    If you wish to be a snivelling wimp, you are welcome to. The highest murder rates in the US are in places where gun laws are highly restrictive, and more than 90% of all murders where guns are used are carried out by convicted felons who are barred from possession of a firearm anyway. The fact that YOU want to beg for your life does NOT mean that I am willing to. Sorry, pal…I’d rather stand up and fight.

  6. Oh, and BTW…the Oregon mall shooting was stopped by a patron carrying a weapon legally with a CCW license. You won’t hear about that on the news, though. How many people are alive because one law-abiding citizen with a gun was willing to step up?

    Go stick your head in the sand. It’s what you’re good at.

  7. I hope, don’t know “R for Republitard”, honestly calling him a retard would insult the disabled. Sheesh, I don’t even like it when people use the term “Libtard” or when idiots would call Romney “Robme” like a bunch of toddlers. Try using words that exist, its makes you look more mature, intelligent and less like an intolerant ass.

  8. Funny thing about that Oregon mall shooting…(oh, yeah–you pointed it out already, Mel. Allow me to expand.)

    The pathetic coward got two people, and then, when an armed citizen drew down on him, he ran off into a stairwell and blew his brains out. How many more would have died if that man hadn’t been there and ready to offer resistance? A lot more than two, I’d wager.

    The scum who perpetrate these massacres DELIBERATELY pick “gun free zones” because they don’t want a fight. They want a shooting gallery, where they can murder as many people as possible before they’re stopped. When they meet up with real resistance, they fold instantly. How about we have the armed resistance already on the scene instead of waiting for the police–you know, people with GUNS?

    Only ONE mass shooting in the last 50 years has happened outside a “gun free zone.” That was the Tucson shooting, by a guy who wasn’t simply a rage-filled loser, but a full-fledged schizophrenic. The rest of these murderous cowards may be disturbed, but they’re not literally crazy. They know exactly what they’re doing, and in a civilized society, we wouldn’t put up signs that say, basically, “here’s a whole bunch of targets and there’s no way anyone can stop you. Kill at will.”

    But I guess allowing innocent people the means to defend themselves would make too much sense.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s