July 20, Gunman kills 12, wounds 58, at a mall theater in Aurora, CO

Democrat Barack Obama: “Michelle and I are shocked and saddened by the horrific and tragic shooting in Colorado…. We are committed to bringing whoever was responsible to justice, ensuring the safety of our people, and caring for those who have been wounded. As we do when confronted by moments of darkness and challenge, we must now come together as one American family. All of us must have the people of Aurora in our thoughts and prayers as they confront the loss of family, friends, and neighbors, and we must stand together with them in the challenging hours and days to come.

Republican Mitt Romney: “Ann and I are deeply saddened by the news of the senseless violence that took the lives of 15 people in Colorado and injured dozens more. We are praying for the families and loved ones of the victims during this time of deep shock and immense grief. We expect that the person responsible for this terrible crime will be quickly brought to justice.”


August 5, 2012 Gunman kills 6, wounds 4, at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, WI

Democrat Barack Obama: “Michelle and I were deeply saddened to learn of the shooting that tragically took so many lives in Wisconsin. At this difficult time, the people of Oak Creek must know that the American people have them in our thoughts and prayers, and our hearts go out to the families and friends of those who were killed and wounded….”

Republican Mitt Romney: “Ann and I extend our thoughts and prayers to the victims of today’s shooting in Wisconsin. This was a senseless act of violence and a tragedy that should never befall any house of worship. Our hearts are with the victims, their families and the entire Oak Creek Sikh community. We join Americans everywhere in mourning those who lost their lives and in prayer for healing in the difficult days ahead.”

August 13, Gunman kills two, injures four, College Station, TX

September 27, Gunman kills six, injures 4 at sign-making company, Minneapolis, MN

October 21, 2012 Gunman kills wife, six other women, at spa in Brookfield, WI

December 11, 2012 Gunman kills two, injures one in shopping mall, Happy Valley, OR

December 14, 2012 Gunman kills 20 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook School in Newtown, Conn:

“There…I am sure, will be…a day for discussion of the usual Washington policy debates, but I do not think today is that day.” – Obama press secretary Jay Carney, commenting on the Newtown tragedy, and on what might be done about the enormous number of innocent people killed by guns in America.

# #

GRAPHIC: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kciS4VWEk1Y/TgyDhmZir1I/AAAAAAAAAR4/-xlG7tYkWFM/s1600/alg_stop_sign.jpg

32 responses to “Controlling Gun Violence: Not a Prayer?”

  1. $4856232 says:

    …from what I am observing, I believe humanity is becoming a little unhinged. Possibly from being to successful procreating the species and bringing about developing insecurities and resultant aggressions. Experiments were done by social scientists in the 50’s with rats and chickens. It now appears humans can suffer the same result over time. It will only get worse until population stabilizes and the pressure on both humanity and the earth’s resources subsides.

  2. Susan_ol says:

    The one common denominator by far in all these surprise mass murders is the human Y chromosome. Why do we continue to look for other things to blame? When are we going to understand that much of our society still pushes males toward a warrior culture? Look at the movie stars and the kinds of poeple they play. Look at our sports (sports are usually a form of war games) and the riots that occur after some of the big victories. There’s a relationship there. Look at our idolization of the military, and how the US military has been infused with extremist religion. This is a Jesus comes with a sword kind of Christianity, not Jesus playing a game of resistance & wits with a burning bush; not a Jesus in the temple confounding the wise elders with his intelligence! We can see how this warlike mindset is morphing into  attempts to control the perceived power of women. Several people in this society have the idea that calm, logically-minded men are somehow emasculated by “liberated” women (“Feminazis”). We have to find societies that are more civil and study how their cultures make them so, because we can’t keep doing these kinds of things to ourselves. We can’t assume that Americans are naturally better than others, because clearly we could learn from someone else. Societies that get along are societies that work.

    • uncle albert says:

       We do find societies that are more civil – and we obliterate them. At least since 1492 anyway. Some people might say that we’re running out of nice civil societies to obliterate, and that’s why we are now obliterating ourselves, beginning with children and women – why? Because they don’t fight back…

      Seriously, Susan, you’re right, but wanting something doesn’t make it happen. All the horrid violence is just going to get worse until it gets better… That’s to say that the European-Colombian Exchange is just about all violence of one sort or another. After the die-off, well, maybe then things will quiet down. Meantime, standing up for yourself is almost as effective as running away.

      In my school days, at public schools in California, we had an armory at school – with perhaps 200 M-1 Garand rifles and we had a rifle team with target .22 rifles. We all carried our rifles across the athletic field to target practice under the bleachers. We drilled with M-1s. I know the Principal had a revolver – as I saw it once in his hand. So did one of the P.E. coaches and the JROTC commandant. Nobody ever got shot.

      Maybe that was because there were no serious gun laws – maybe that’s because almost all males got military training and knew about the results of undisciplined shooting – maybe it’s because people weren’t doped up on “medicinal” drugs –  I can’t say…

      But terrible violence is simply part of our time. There are choices – but they all come down to either running away or fighting back. So the only question for ordinary people is whether or not we shall have a viable option of fighting back. That’s not nice, but that’s the two possible post hoc states.

  3. dogkato says:

    Americans need to wake up and take a good look in the mirror to see what we really are instead of believing what’s being fed by MSM and politicans that we’re a peace loving nation. The reality is that we are a VIOLENT country who’s constantly been at war killing thousands of innocent women and children for no other purpose than oil. Despite all  the usual rhetoric, nothing will change and we’ll go on killing both at home and abroad because we want our guns and world power. Sad but true.

  4. Johnmacek says:

    The United States is the largest weapons maker and seller to the entire world. In short “what goes around comes around” Im sick of this “Warrior” culture. I mean REALLY tired of it all. 

  5. Third Dan says:

    Given the abundant graphic violence in movies and TV (Hollywood is one of Obama’s biggest $ contributors) and the violence in video games, why are we surprised when this is played out in real time?  One solution:  offer martial arts training in high school;  then young people will learn self-respect and self-control and avoid conflict whenever possible.

  6. KGB says:

    Oh that’s interesting, switch a couple of words here and there, change a location and you’ve basically got the same patent message being said in response to each tragedy. Brings a whole new meaning to Obama’s recent press-conference (crocodile) tears.

  7. uncle albert says:

    Ok, it’s “lawful US Policy” to blow people to bits, including children and including American children. What’s the moral difference between that and the business at Sandy Hook? There is a difference, but what is it?

    • KGB says:

      There is no ‘moral’ difference. Neither Government, nor killers have them (morals).

    • uncle albert says:

       You might want to explore the word “moral”. Essentially it means the way things have been done for a long time, “custom”, but it includes constitutional law. that’s important especially for the people who do not have a written constitution. By reason of such definitions the actions of both parties are “moral”. Again, what difference exists? Some people might want to ask if there’s a racial component here…

    • Arthur Shoemaker says:

      Where do you come up with the definition that moral means essentially the way things have been done for a long time or custom.  You are really stretching it with that definition.

      The usual meaning is conforming to the rules of right conduct ( opposed to immoral ): a moral man.

      I think you should explore the word moral and not KGB.

    • uncle albert says:

       It’s the classical definition, though the educated class understands that this means “moral within an Nth moral code”. The mafia has a moral code, for example. It has the effect of good or bad only within its code. What’s worthwhile here is exploring how one application of child murder is more or less ok with most people, and how another very similar application is not ok. Since 1492, for example, most Europeans have been ok with the systematic policy of murder of brown people…

    • uncle albert says:

       Herodotus explores the conflicting nature of moral codes. Evidently he saw matters of morals in the classical way, and as educated people do to-day. It’s valuable to explore this, as it exposes truths that are by custom never or almost never open to examination – as we see now.

  8. sgtdoom says:

    The Motive

    Today, some highly paid, brainless twit on the Wall Street Journal News Online, reported that police were searching for the motive for the mass murder of children at a Connecticut elementary school.

    The motive?

    An Afghanistani sheep herder returned to his home and found the scattered body parts of his wife and children.  He gathered up their remains and gave them a proper burial, then sat and pondered the motive of the Americans who sent the drone to do that horrible killing.

    The motive?

    The super-rich laid off workers and offshored their jobs to the cheapest sweatshop in Bangladesh and workers there died horribly due to extremely substandard conditions, and Walmart falsely claims no knowledge of the location of their factories nor origins of the product.

    The motive?

    Many eons ago, in an Asian war, the team I was with was ordered to destroy a village of innocents to cover up a command mistake — instead, we fragged the brigadier general who was on site and had issued the order, then blamed his death on “the enemy.”

    Our motive was clear:  murder the guilty to save the innocent.

    I make no claim to understand the motives of the mentally ill, the psychopaths and the greedheads, but perhaps the answer lies within our reach.

    The president of the University of Washington once clerked for Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist when he rendered the decision to empty out mental institutions and set the stage for defunding mental health in America, perhaps that UW president knows the motive?



  9. A2601448 says:

    People, wake up. SSRIs and other psychotropic drugs are always the deciding factor in these mass shootings. A normal, undrugged, untrained human being cannot behave this way. The pattern is always the same. Stop giving psychotropic drugs to children.

    Have you noticed that the only permissible debate pertaining to these shootings is “Gun Control?” There are 300 million guns in American hands — do you really believe that everyone will just blindly turn in their guns? No way. The guns are already out there. It’s time to pay attention to the other key factors in these mass shootings.

    Other countries have guns. A person can do at least as much damage, kill at least as many people with a 12-gauge shotgun as they can with a 9 mm handgun. You can get a shotgun in England, France, Spain, literally anywhere. Why do we have this problem only here in America?

    AK-47s are sold in open markets all over the Middle East. But they don’t have this problem there. Only here in America.

    Have you ever fired a handgun? It is very difficult for untrained people to hit anything more than 10-15 feet away, especially moving targets. If your aim is one inch off, it translates into 2 – 3 feet on the other end of the bullet, which is coming from a short barrel and firing at relatively slow speeds. Much easier to hit with a shotgun, which scatters pellets in a relatively wide pattern.

    Why do you read stories about trained cops who fire 42 rounds and hit the target 3 times? These cops are trained. The reason is that it is difficult to hit anything with a handgun, especially in a high-stress situation.

    These shooters are highly trained and they are drugged into a zombie-like state.

    Stop babbling like media-conditioned monkeys about Gun Control and start doing some real investigative work into the commonalities of these events.

    Start looking into the issues that are quite deliberately not discussed by the Mass Media.

    • edwardrynearson says:

      “the meds” is a red herring > like we discussed here a few weeks ago, there are no loan gunmen

    • A2601448 says:

      Agreed. But you have to start somewhere, and Gun Control is hardly where I’d expect this web site to start. Isn’t this supposed to be “Who What Why?” Where’s the investigative journalism?

      More kneejerk Gun Control crap from the Controlled Media. Russ Baker, are you listening? Or are you another CIA journalist in disguise? 

    • Russ says:

      Didnt you see my CIA nametag? LOL

    • BB says:

      Ed: Who loaned him the guns?

    • Arthur Shoemaker says:

      You are correct  In fact the citizens of Israel that love our money and weapons of mass destruction given to them are required to be armed.

      I guess that is because they like the USSA murder people in other countries daily and our MSM says nothing about it.

      Our murder and chief use drones to kill foreign kids and US citizens and nothing is said and no one sheds a tear.

      Since the Newton approx. 2000 kids a day have been murdered which is approx. 10000 kids.  It is called abortion and no one sheds a tear.

  10. Guest says:

    The authors of the Second Amendment were far more concerned with the prospect of people being forced to carry arms than with the prospect of being prohibited from carrying arms. This is not an opinion; it’s a fact backed up by all early drafts of the Second Amendment. Take this draft, for instance:

    “A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the
    best security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear
    arms shall not be infringed; but no person religiously scrupulous shall
    be compelled to bear arms.”

    Yes, I know… Most of you have never seen this language, even though it’s impossible to understand the Second Amendment without it. That’s the way the guns sellers want it.  They want you and your democratically elected leaders to remain woefully ignorant. 

    So why not take the time to educate yourselves?  You don’t have to be stupid tools of corporations forever.

    • Ponderer says:

       Right–weapons were for the purpose of being part of an organized, sanctioned, state militia, not using them for one’s own purposes. So it was never about being able to shoot whoever frightened or angered a person, adopting a hobby, or other things.

    • edwardrynearson says:

      not according to Thomas Jefferson

    • KGB says:

      A Militia is dependent on the ‘people’ from which it is composed; the amendment speaks specifically to the constitution of a that (‘what’ and from ‘whom’ it is composed). The amendment itself does not expressly say what an ‘armed’ populace can or cannot do outside of that activity (because that’s not its intention). Please refer to documentation of the time as Edward hinted above.

    • Arthur Shoemaker says:

      I guess you missed the part that states the right of the people (all people) to keep and bear arms.

      I guess in yoor mind only an official militiary could carry arms to keep us free from government tyrany.  That is a lot of baloney.  Individuals who love freedom over security have the right to bear arms.

    • Susan_ol says:

      The “arms” the amendment speaks of was the kind in which you had to pour a little powder down the muzzle of the gun, then tamp it down, then put in a ball of the appropriate size, then tamp that down, then a little more powder, tamp that, then add a little powder in the priming pan so that when the trigger was pulled, the striker would hit the flint, showering sparks into the firing pan, which would fire the charge in the bore, propelling the ball into the intended target . . . . . . we’re talking 1789 here.

      I find it very odd that the Supreme Court who decided the amendment gave everyone and anyone in America a constitutional right to be armed – these SAME JUSTICES (Scalia in particular) like to CALL THEMSELVES “strict constructionists,” meaning that they believe that the Constitution was written ONLY FOR THE CONDITIONS OF THE TIME and does not necessarily apply to future times. Using their logic, this means that we are only Constitutionally entitled to have weapons such as the one described above, which would never result in more than one death in the best of circumstances.

      Bring back the assault-weapons ban!

    • Jfgudk says:

      You are saddly mistaken. The primary purpose of the second ammendment is as a “bulwark against tyranny”. The first thing a tyrant must do is disarm his subjects. In fact the revolutionary war was started by a gun control action by the Kings men.

    • Arthur Shoemaker says:

      I believeu are a little confused and do not really understand what the authors of the second amendment were convying in this draft.

      They were not concerned with people carrying guns except if they were religiously scrupulous.

      The meaning of religously scrupulous is usually that  It’s against their scrupples or moral principles (to kill others) with guns.

      The above did not pertain to all people.

  11. jimmmmmy says:

    Gun violence is simply a symptom , not the cause of the carnage that Americans do to themselves and others. For every murder there are 3 suicides. Gun violence is used as a wonderful wedge issue used by gun makers and gun haters with government sanction and aid to both. Of course our government also longs for the type of complete control that the Chinese have over their gun controlled citizens . So I guess we will now see 2 weeks of media whipped up histrionics on this subject.

    • Walllllter says:

       In other words, you have nothing useful to say about what might prevent such tragedies.

    • jim mcdonagh says:

      Not so, I have much to say about how to stop Americans from being the most murderous tribe on Earth,  but gun violence has little to do with it.

  12. John Parulis says:

    Truthout published Benjamin Van Houten’s recommendation at http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13358-four-ways-to-stop-gun-violence. The ATF idea seems the most likely to gain traction in Congress.

Subscribe to the Daily WhoWhatWhy

Relevant, in-depth journalism delivered to you.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.