1. Download the #1 Android News App:   EarlyBird - News for Android
    Dismiss Notice

18 Kids and 9 Others Shot Dead in CT.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Last Updated:

  1. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

    I'm tired of the reporters walking down the street and asking everybody the same asinine questions-"where were you when it happened?", "how does it make you feel?", "did you ever think this could happen here?" Ugh. On the other hand, some of the parents really want to talk about their children. A couple have invited Anderson Cooper into their homes to talk about their kids, and it was extremely moving. I do think it's enough with the 24/7 coverage. If they have something new to report, fine. Otherwise give it a rest.

    I think some of the people who come to the ridiculous teddy bear monument are there just to try to get on TV. Sad thing about our reality show/fame whore culture.

    dustwun77 likes this.
  2. zuben el genub

    zuben el genub Well-Known Member

  3. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Well-Known Member

    Bullet proof backpacks? Fortress schools? Rifle slinging teachers? Armed guards posted where kids play?

    Way to give your kids some sort of PTSD on par with Gazan kids.
    Gmash likes this.
  4. pbf98

    pbf98 Well-Known Member Contributor

    I don't agree with the coverage that there is with this. I wish the news would just have said their views on it for a couple of days and then let the people care for one another with out having to fear turning on the news, or going to a website that might remind them of the horrible event that happened.

    I think it is an outrage with what that Westboro is doing, and I have seen quite a few postings on other sites of the leaders personal address and home phone and email ect.. and messages saying send this man the kinkiest dirtiest explicit material. What they do is just wrong too.

    Truth is the news media will continue publishing and producing these stories as long as they can, they will milk it for all its worth. They say they care about the families affected, but they don't, they know that they will gain revenue from curious onlookers, also to affect the swing on gun control. If you watch any news other than fox i think it is, they will first do their talks about gun control and why it needs to be "better" and then after that, they will do funeral coverage of the victims. This appears to me a way to persuade more people into thinking guns are the problem.

    If a reporter were to come up to me I would tell them
    "You know what I think of this whole situation? I think that everyone knows what happened. Lets leave it at that, lets let the victims' friends and family grieve and allow them the personal space they are lacking. News media has reported enough on this topic.."
    at least something along those lines

    I wish they would see that they are doing more harm than good for the families
    dustwun77 likes this.
  5. copestag

    copestag Well-Known Member

    they could always go back to reporting on the soldiers being killed every day in Iraq and Afghanistan....... of course most Americans probably dont realize we still have soldiers fighting overseas..... since the day Bush left office the media stopped reporting on it
  6. lEquin0xl

    lEquin0xl Well-Known Member

    Yea the media is just plain worthless nowadays along with the crime investigators. In all seriousness who I am the world cares how the children died, how many times they got shot, what gun killed them, it's all useless irrelevant facts and a waste of time.
  7. zuben el genub

    zuben el genub Well-Known Member

    The PBS newshour is still reporting. They do it in total silence and respect as pictures become available.

    They also did a roll call for the children and adults in Newtown. Appropriate backgrounds for kids' photos, but also in silence and respect.
  8. zuben el genub

    zuben el genub Well-Known Member

  9. copestag

    copestag Well-Known Member

    the irony being how strict pennsylvania is on guns and heres a guy with a gun? or the irony being that if they werent so very strict that guy would have been stopped within 5 mins?
  10. kool kat2

    kool kat2 Well-Known Member

    No one ever mentions that if it weren't for the guns in the hands of law enforcement we would have to wait until the guy ran out of ammo. Depending on how much ammo, it would be a long wait with an excessive amount of casualties.

    And unfortunately, Not enough people own guns at the moment to scare any of these clowns anyway.
  11. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

    How would more people with guns scare these shooters when the vast majority of them don't plan on surviving anyway? Most of them kill themselves or commit suicide by cop. Kind of hard to scare somebody who already plans on dying.
  12. zuben el genub

    zuben el genub Well-Known Member

    What's to stop someone from buying a gun legally outside a state? Since private sales are not vetted?

    You own a gun and move? We have a pistol that hasn't seen any use in over 30 years. If we moved, it would get tossed in a box (broken down and unloaded) and go with us. It might never be unpacked. Nobody would ask us if we have weapons on buying a house in another state.

    Or the sale of the contents of a forfeited storage unit. The sale of said contents is legal, and it would be up to the buyer to declare a weapon if one was in a box somewhere.
  13. pbf98

    pbf98 Well-Known Member Contributor

    If you have a half hour to "waste" give this a watch.

    It has some strong language so it is nsfw

    This is the other side of gun control, you have probably heard plenty thats all for gun control and feeding you reasons why they say we need it. Here is another perspective of it.

    They also talk about the violent over throw of the US government, but their main point is what they think of gun control.

    I think they make some good points
  14. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Well-Known Member

    People violently overthrowing their government rarely ends well, and in most cases is ridiculous. Brevik wished to violently overthrow his government.

    Its not a reason for people to own heavy weaponry.
  15. kool kat2

    kool kat2 Well-Known Member

    Good point. However, if by some dumb luck someone with a gun is standing in the sae area as the maniac and has time to draw the weapon, he may be able to take out the bad guy before too much damage is done. I know, there aren't many examples of that but its a possibility id like to live with rather than just know when $#! + gets real, i have to wait until the ammo is gone. By then itll probably be too late for most of those in the area.


    One example of someone using a gun for good. Policy shmolicy, if the employees had died it would not have been an issue.
  16. kool kat2

    kool kat2 Well-Known Member

    Unfortunately, other than just in case i don't see a reason to... Although if there's a reason to say just in case, there's a reason to own........ Of course without anyone owning these types of weapons there wouldn't be mass killings.... Unless someone really wanted to and just used multiple loaded pistols........
  17. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    Our founding fathers disagreed. Our country started by overthrowing a tyrannical government. Just saying.
    pbf98 likes this.
  18. PrinceCorwin

    PrinceCorwin Well-Known Member

    :ditto:'nuff said!
    pbf98 likes this.
  19. saptech

    saptech Well-Known Member

    Similar to the current government...

    One lesser tyrant then the other! :confused:
  20. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Well-Known Member

    Oh no, having to pay taxes, how tyrannical. I agree about the whole taxation without representation thing, and certainly the federation said founding fathers built was way ahead of any other system at the time, but nonetheless. They were not infallible, and I think tyrannical is very harsh.

    As an argument for ownership of weapons? Pretty weak. Muhammad had a lot of excellent ideas, doesnt mean that a man should take multiple wives (while woman couldnt do vice versa), or that women should be legally worth less today.

  21. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    They are simply doing their job.

    You might spend your day putting wing nuts on widgets and reporters do whatever they can to grab that next memorable quote. You do your job and the reporter is just doing his or her job.

    I turn off the news after I know most of the story.

    Nothing new, just a pile of dead kids, the shooter will never see jail and more kids will die because we do not know what to do, short of banning guns. This will not work and banning guns is a worse tragedy than the death of even children.
  22. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    How do laws prevent this from happening? We have lots of deaths that happen even though we have stricter gun laws. And there are countries with lots of guns that do not suffer the problems we have.

    We decided to protect schools, yet we have shootings in schools.

    We pass laws to keep guns out of the hands of bad people so the bad people break into our homes and steal our guns. If we use our guns for protection and we shoot the bad guy, we stand a good chance of going to jail and the press starts talking about the dangers of guns in the home and they spin what is our God Given Right to protect ourselves in our homes into something else.

    We ban "assault weapons" and we do not seem to know what an assault weapon is.

    We make it harder for decent people to purchase guns, yet we do nothing about the laws that allow me to privately purchase a gun from someone I do not know; someone who does not know me. We seem to want gun control in one form or another, so we go over the top and pass laws that only make it harder for good folks to "keep and bear arms."

    Many gun rights advocates think some sort of law is needed to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people, ex-felons and others, yet they will fight to the death, any law that restricts private sales and gun show sales. And if I am allowed by law to purchase a Ruger 357, then why not eliminate BC checks at gun stores?

    I think every gun --from .22 cal single shots to 50 cal--should be available over the counter after a simple and uncomplicated background check. If the government wants to chip away at our RIGHTS!!! they should put the mechanism in place to make it easier for decent people to own guns of all kinds.

    If they cant figure out a system that makes sense, then we need to ban all gun laws.

    If we do not figure out what to do, the government can effectively ban most guns by laws that might be Constitutional.
  23. Zero Hunter

    Zero Hunter Well-Known Member

    I totally agree with you. The media really needs to stop talking about this horror and let everyone that are directly affected to be able to mourn their loss in peace. The more attention the media gives to this killer, the more it gives other potential killers ideas that it's ok and how "glorifying" this can be for them. Why can't the news/media portray and repeat more positive deeds people have done that have impacted their community rather than constantly talking about a travesty?
  24. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    Not sure, but my guess is back in the good old days, this story would have been discussed just as much as it is today, perhaps more. I absolutely guarantee you that if it happened back in the day, it would be the topic of discussion for months to come. Newspapers would likely have published special editions because it would have been huge news across the planet.

    Newspaper men and women had to get the story and God help you if you let another newspaper or TV station scoop you. We called them 'reporters' back in the day; they reported something we called the news. They fought for every column inch and their careers depended on getting the story, getting that comment or unnoticed fact. Reporters could be ruthless in those days and reporters wanted headlines above the fold.

    Perhaps the story would be covered much more and far longer because it would have been a much bigger story back in the day because these things simply did not happen.

    As for others learning to do what this killer did based upon the news reports, I am not sure that can be proven. Seems logical, but is it true? Not sure it is. If it is true, perhaps we need to ban the news?

    I do think for the most part, news coverage is sloppy these days and most news organizations are certainly not as good as they once were. Some argue that it is too much coverage and I might agree to a point. But that is how it has always been. I recall when we only had three TV stations and two local papers and no Internet. Most cities had several papers and most papers published special editions as well as both evening and morning editions.

    To be fair, lots of papers would be sold because tragic events sell papers and that is what papers need to do and want to do. I am almost jaded enough to say horrific events are things publishers wait for because they want to sell newspapers.

    Back in the good old days, coverage was handled differently. Editors actually loved facts and God help you if you behaved like so many
  25. pbf98

    pbf98 Well-Known Member Contributor

    For those of you who do not know what tyranny is:
    Cruel and oppressive government or rule.
    A nation under such cruel and oppressive government.

    While I don't see this government as being cruel, I do see trying to take away our rights to be oppressive.

    "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson

    Violently overthrowing governments doesn't work? I wonder if our founding fathers knew this..
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson
    He is even telling us that to keep the government from becoming tyrannical we need to rebel. Now I have heard that he had also said that there should be a rebellion every 20 years, but I have not been able to find an accurate source for that.

    Our second amendment is one of our most important rights, because it protects all our other rights. If any of our found fathers could here these debates about banning guns they would be rolling in their graves. It is the biggest pile of nonsense there is.

    And some argue with me that back then they only had muskets... this amendment is expansive, it grows with the time. The founding fathers didn't give us the right to keep and bear arms for recreation or to hunt, they gave it to us to deter the government from becoming tyrannic. They knew that someday they're own government would go against their principals they had put in place to define freedom.

    "My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." -Thomas Jefferson

    I think we have just that... too much government.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page