Posts Tagged ‘Rocky Mountain News’

Who is really at fault in these shootings?

December 20, 2012

This shooting is yet another tragic example of the failed, grotesque insistence on helpless victim zones where any crazed gunman can be assured of a large number of disarmed, undefended, helpless victims, all crammed into one place, where he can kill many children before an armed defender arrives from elsewhere.  It is disturbing and sick that the federal government so hates the right of the American people to bear arms, and so hates their natural right to self defense, that the government insists on making them helpless, disarmed victims for anyone who cares to kill them.   And in this case, all of the teachers and staff were willfully disarmed by the Federal Government, by force of law and threat of prison, to ensure that they would be disarmed and incapable of saving the lives of the children entrusted to their care.

That makes the Federal Government complicit in the deaths of these children, and in fact an accessory to their mass murder, by forcibly disarming (with the very real threat of prison) all the teachers, all the staff, and any parent who may have been on school property.  That stupid law guaranteed the shooters would meet no immediate armed resistance, which is exactly what is needed to stop such an attack.

In such a shooting (as in every criminal attack), seconds count, and the people best positioned to stop the attack are the people on the scene – the intended victims and/or their care-takers.  In this case, that would mean the teachers and staff of the school who were responsible for the well-being of those children, and also the parents, who should have the ability to save the lives of their own children as they take them to and from school.

The police cannot, and do not arrive in time to stop such shooters from killing large numbers of people.  They are a slow reactive force compared to an armed citizen on the scene.   This should be common sense, as it is obvious that in the immediacy of a criminal attack, it is the intended victims (or their immediate care-takers) who are there, in position to put a stop to the attack, if they are capable.  And being capable means being armed, trained, willing, and able to use deadly force, right then, right there.  Anything less leads to what we saw here.

But no doubt the rabid anti-gun government supremacists will use this to further their agenda to disarm the American people, totally ignoring that obvious, plain-as-day truth.   Anti-gun nuts trust the government with guns, but not the people, and insist that the lowly citizen must be disarmed and helpless in the face of murderous assault, and must wait on slow responding armed government employees, who will not be there when the attack starts, and most often can only really clean up the horrendous crime scene afterwards and maybe, just maybe apprehend a shooter who has chosen not to kill himself (as they usually do).

The bottom line is that these teachers and staff at the Sandy Hook Elementary School were incapable of keeping these children safe, and incapable of defending them.  And one of the biggest reasons they were so incapable and unprepared to save the lives of the children entrusted to their care is because the anti-gun nuts and their fellow travelers in government insisted on disarming every adult in the vicinity, by threatening them with prison time – EXCEPT the gunmen, who don’t care about the law and thus were not disarmed.    laws against carrying weapons in schools don’t stop evil men with murderous intent.  Such laws only disarm the law abiding and virtuous, who are now rendered incompetent to defend the precious children in their care.

This is disgusting.  And yet another reason to home-school.  Why would you want to leave your children helpless, in the hands of adults who are  themselves helpless, and incapable of defending them, by government decree?  For all we know, one of the teachers may have been a veteran, with the training and skill to use a firearm if one had been available.  But all the teachers and staff, whatever their ability with firearms, were stripped of the choice and chance to save the lives of these kids.

There are more good guys than bad guys in the world.  But the good guys need to be able to stop the bad guys, and that means  they need to be armed so they can stop the bad guys on the spot, without having to wait for “official” government approved good guys to respond.  Trust the teachers with arms so they can save the lives of their students.

Until the adults are allowed to actually act like adults, and defend themselves and their students, this kind of willful killing will continue to happen, and the federal government will in each case be a guilty party to the conspiracy by ensuring that the targets are disarmed.

Until this changes, you should refuse to give your children over to government schools lorded over by a Federal Government so callous and indifferent to their safety and lives.

Stewart Rhodes,
Founder of Oath Keepers

SOURCE

Some years ago I wrote about Free Fire Zones and public safety in a letter to the editor at The Rocky Mountain News. Not a damned thing has changed since then. Other than Columbine, and all the rest of these mass killings of innocent people. Gun up people! The answer is more freedom and liberty, not less! More laws will change nothing. Other than make more victims of social predators.

 

Just announced, the Rocky dies

February 26, 2009

The Rocky Mountain News, Colorado’s oldest newspaper will cease operations tomorrow.

More about this later.

“Never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

February 6, 2009

“It’s the economy stupid.” Remember that? I do, and then I also remember George H.W. Bush’s statement “Read my lips, no new taxes.”

The current mess that the economy is in makes George Bush a handy whipping boy. While at the same time conveniently forgetting that it was the Congress that forced those in the market to grant loans and general credit to people that just plain were not qualified. Now that same Congress is playing what basically is the same hand in a card game called  “The House of Cards.” What follows are two similar, but different approaches for caging the tiger. While at the same time pointing out the fallacies of the Democrat proposal (s) that simply continue to hang onto the tigers tail.

First, from Mike Rosen from the Rocky Mountain News;

Here’s the opening paragraph from a New York Times story by reporter Robert Pear (please note that this is a news story in the oh-so-liberal New York Times): “The stimulus bill working its way through Congress is not just a package of spending increases and tax cuts to jolt the nation out of recession. For Democrats, it is also a tool for rewriting the social contract with the poor, the uninsured and the unemployed, in ways they have long yearned to do.”

Reinforcing that assessment is this quote from White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel: “Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.”

It would be bad enough if HR 1, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 – a gargantuan $900 billion so-called economic stimulus bill – were merely an overblown accumulation of largely misdirected, politically motivated or wasteful government spending. Examples in the bill abound, like $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, $4 million for ACORN or $75 million to discourage cigarette smoking. But those items are nickels and dimes. Calling it “pork laden” is too kind.

FULL STORY HERE

Then, from CNN we have a Libertarian perspective;

Editor’s note: Jeffrey A. Miron is senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University

CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (CNN) — When libertarians question the merit of President Obama’s stimulus package, a frequent rejoinder is, “Well, we have to do something.” This is hardly a persuasive response. If the cure is worse than the disease, it is better to live with the disease.

In any case, libertarians do not argue for doing nothing; rather, they advocate eliminating or adjusting policies that are bad for the economy independent of the recession. Here is a stimulus package that libertarians can endorse:

Repeal the Corporate Income Tax: Repeal would spur investment, improve the transparency of corporate accounting, slash compliance costs, and avoid the distortions caused by the special-interest provisions in the tax code. Repeal can work fast, by raising companies’ share prices, increasing cash flow, and allowing corporations to lessen their need for bank lending.

hus repeal provides short-run stimulus and enhances long-run efficiency. Recent estimates suggest that tax cuts are at least as effective as spending increases in raising GDP. The adverse impact on the deficit is likely to be less than the $300-$350 billion in revenue the corporate tax takes in per year, since repeal spurs growth and therefore the revenue from other taxes.

Increase Carbon Taxes While Lowering Marginal Tax Rates: Reasonable people disagree about how much the U.S. should reduce its use of fossil fuels, but crowded highways, air pollution, and global warming all suggest that some reduction is desirable.

The effective way to accomplish this is higher gasoline or other carbon taxes, not the messy, complicated green spending in the Obama plan that will morph into pork in many cases. If higher carbon taxes are combined with lower marginal tax rates, the private sector faces better incentives on both counts. This approach avoids the higher deficits implied by Obama’s green initiatives.

Moderate the Growth of Entitlements: The elephant in the room amidst the stimulus debate is the impending imbalance in Social Security and Medicare as the baby boom generation moves into retirement. Without reductions in benefits, taxes will have to increase substantially, generating a major drag on the U.S. economy.

FULL STORY HERE

Both people have very defined ideas. Which beats the Democrat idea of tossing good money after bad IMO. What do you think..?


%d bloggers like this: