Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
demanding to know why some families have not been notified; fomenting anger over the "gap"; anger that the shooter has not been identified.
While there is mention of opportunistic supporters of gun control, there is "reassurance" that the SECOND AMMENDMENT 'RIGHTS' are not up for discussion with the usual pablum that if any of the victims had been armed "perhaps" the shooter would have been taken out ...
This country lost its heart a while back ... I live in Colorado, knew people who had kids whose older siblings were at Columbine ... the Columbine aftermath of viciously blaming the parents for the bad acts of their 16-17 year old (suicidal) "children" was awful .... maybe I'm just cursed with a long memory ... but what I'm hearing tonight on TV really chills me, particularly the degree to which the media appears to be SETTING THE AGENDA, DEFINING THE CONTROVERSY ...
Living with uncertainty is part of TOLERANCE, part WISDOM, but mostly ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY ... there's stuff we will NEVER KNOW...
Like I said, what I'm hearing -- the blaming, the second-guessing, the "pointed" questions -- is chilling and, imho, pointlessly cynical/skeptical and ultimately damaging for the survivors and those whose grieving has just begun.
Sound too much like hate-mongering to me. I'm hating this.
You know the spin, the one that festers under a rock until it decides to crawl out . . .
The nasty spin where we blame the victims. Or the 'liberals'. You'll hear some short person (in the Randy Newman sense of 'short')say something along the line that "had these college kids been packin', this would never have happened. They could have taken the shooter out before he had a chance to hurt anyone." (Is it just me, but why has the more precise noun 'MURDERER' been replaced by the silly term 'shooter'????). This evil spin will go on to say that snivelling bleeding heart un-American libtards are responsible because they are trying to take away your gawd-given constitutional right to carry arms.
I'm so glad that other readers are hesitant to immediately start blaming the administration. This is tragic, horribly tragic, and I have trouble believing that anyone at the university would have willfully left students in the dark. As others have said, this shooting doesn't really follow the typical pattern.
"It may have been reasonable to not shut down the campus after one murder, but it takes time to kill over 30 people, and I can't see how that could have happened without any alarms going off."
It doesn't take much time to kill 30 people with automatic weapons.
Sickening.
Survivors are reporting that the shooter was looking for his girlfriend to kill her, and simply mowed down everyone else in his path. Absolutely sickening.
If 33 isn't a good number to cause the unlimited Second Amendment types to pause then what is the right number? I ask that honestly. These events appear to creep up; 15, 19, 33 and so on. So if 33 isn't a good number what is? 41? 54? 79? 115?
What's a good number to at least get them to engage the question of whether the Second Ammendment truly is open ended? I wonder where the backlash will occur? If the next attack kills 5 dozen children will that be enough? If a crazed lone gunman kills 145 people at a football game, will that be enough? This shooter shot 60 people armed with only 2 handguns. Two. A friend of mine had 17 guns stolen from his house. 17. All modern semi automatic so clearly there are people out there with personal stockpiles of dozens of weapons.
See it's no longer about the old argument of having laws versus enforcing laws. It's about the pure numerical threshold for violence people have. How much? It's an honest question. Are you comfortable with not knowing where that limit is? And if there is no limit that the 'defenders' are willing to engage then what? Are we comfortable living where no amount of mass murder will trigger some sort of legal response?
The problem with the police reaction here is the same foul up in Columbine - their preoccupation with "securing the parameter."
Instead of going in right away, at the first indication of trouble, they immediately start sealing off the building. While I guess it makes sense in the old-time hostage situation, it is a terrible idea when dealing with the crazed gunman.
When they secure their beloved parameter, the cops are just ensuring that the gunman can shoot and keep shooting until he or she runs out of ammo. Remember how Dylan and Eric were waving to people from the windows, taunting the police?
In the Virginia Tech tragedy, we see all the pictures from this tragedy, why are the police hiding behind trees, and stopping cars?
Go into the school! Even if you are the first cop on the scene, screw the roadblock, run from class to class, trying the draw his fire! Put your life on the line to save those kids.
Police need to be better trained in taking these people down, not setting up damned parameters.
Thanks for allowing me to vent.
Mongo
..."chains on doors"?? That sounds like pre-meditation to me. Perhaps the first two victims in the dorm were intended as decoys. This is getting very intriguing...and scary.
And I would like to know how they could have missed this guy, moving across such a huge campus armed to the teeth. Somebody mentioned "two pistols", but gunning down 58 people as quickly as this guy apparently did requires a fully automatic assault rifle of some kind. I assume he walked the distance because of the two hour time difference, though I suppose he could have driven to the classroom building waited until everybody was settled into their 9am classes.
it merely merits a brief mention on the national news. No wonder the gravity of that situation escapes so many Americans.
Students were reporting that in the dorm he killed his girlfriend and the counselor who was trying to mediate their argument. But you're right of course to point out that it all looks premeditated. So he may have just known he wanted to kill her and then destroy as much life as possible in his rage.
Is it just me or is this not the first time that one of these mass killings started as a case of domestic violence that just took in a wide swath of bystanders as well? There's definitely a gender component to these crimes that no one ever feels compelled to discuss.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
