fabrisse: (Default)
fabrisse ([personal profile] fabrisse) wrote2012-12-14 02:45 pm
Entry tags:

Newtown, CT

On the one hand, there are no words to express the sadness I feel for those who are going through this ordeal. Nothing is adequate, nor can it be.

But.

We need to talk about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We need to do it now. We need to ask the Supreme Court to define "well-regulated militia."

I want to make it clear that I am not opposed to gun ownership. I am not opposed to hunting (although I prefer it to be skilled not just "lay down covering fire and hope it finds a deer."). I am opposed to concealed weapons being legal for anyone other than law enforcement officers. I would like to discuss the regulation of hand guns and assault weapons whether automatic or semi-automatic.

Even better, I would like this conversation to be held among civilized people without one side spouting bumper sticker slogans at the other (and, frankly, both liberals and conservatives are guilty of this particular sin).

I was evacuated from Vietnam at age 3. No one was shooting at me, but I still had to deal with PTSD that occurred years later. These kids should, when they're older, be able to look back and say "at least my trauma provided some good for my future and my country."

[identity profile] tx-cronopio.livejournal.com 2012-12-14 08:50 pm (UTC)(link)
"like"

[identity profile] nebula99.livejournal.com 2012-12-15 04:01 pm (UTC)(link)
I know gun control is a massive issue in the US and it's easy for us to say how it should be while not having to deal with an organisation like the NRA. The UK banned the owning of handguns after Dunblane and maybe the US needs to take such a step.

This is so, so awful.

[identity profile] thorbol.livejournal.com 2012-12-16 05:06 pm (UTC)(link)
I agree that we should indeed have a full, reasoned discussion of the nation's constitution as it relates to this act of evil. For that matter, we should discuss the constitution concerning a number of things. I most profoundly do *not* believe that the discussion should be primarily about what the courts should do with its language. We need to discuss what the thing actually says, and what changes we should make in the constitution itself to improve it. We can't expect the Supreme Court to pull our butts out of the fire of our own unwillingness to bring our best love and reasoning to the job of making this country work better, even though it has helped from time to time, because it often helps our butts sizzle in the flames or get frostbite in the cold of apathy.