Of course, and is this the same God who prevented the Inquisition, the Crusades and the Holocaust and numerous other atrocities?

Actually it wasn't Reagan. It was the Supreme Court. In the '70's they basically said you couldn't hospitalize someone involunteerily, unless they did something. It is a violation of their rights. It was the ACLU that brought the lawsuit if I remember correctly. In a later lawsuit, the Supreme Court decided that hospitals weren't a fit place for the mentally ill, and says they need to be incorporated into the community, such as halfway houses, community centers, public housing. So, our politicians from Carter on have been acting to meet the requirements of the Supreme Court, as decisions have been made in a series of lawsuits from the 70's to the 90's. So, you can blame the ALCu and the Supreme court for what Reagan and others did.

Back to the subject, I don't have a problems with armed security or armed teachers in schools, but where does that end? So the next shooting will be at a neighborhood park, beach, birthday party, or other spot children gather. Those that have the drive to perform these horrible crimes will just find away around it. Trying to limit guns or protect a certain locality will always only provide a partial solution. And the Supreme court has limited our ability to address the source of the problem. The individuals that do these acts.

I do not see a problem with religion in school because it is not just going to be one religion. No one religion is going to be forced on anyone. I think if they allow religion back in schools, every religion will be allowed. By the way, maybe I am just dumb, but apparently I was in school when religion was allowed in school, and now it is not, but my son is in school, and to tell you the truth, I do not see a difference. Just trying to understand.

Susan you are soooo correct. Mental facilities provided a safe environment where those needing help had a structured, controlled lifestyle. mainstreaming has led to this catastophe and many others. Actually, many of these patients thrived. social and mental health workers cant keep up.

The fear of God will set you straight. Why do you think so many jailbirds turn to God while at the BIG HOUSE?

Agreed Maddie.

I have read that the majority of inmates who find "God" convert to Islam, not Christianity. So lets hand out the Qu'ran in elementary schools? Bible on Mondays. Qu'ran on Tuesdays. The Tipitaka on Wednesdays. Tanakh on Thursdays....Okay, I am running out of Holy book knowledge. :)

The fear of God does not stop people from killing. Though you could make a case for the fear of God encouraging people to kill. I can actually not think of one time that a madman said "I was going to kill 20 children but then I remembered my Sunday school lessons as a child and was deterred." I can, however, think of endless examples of people killing in the name of God.

If Christ came back to earth today, there are many "Christians" who would happily provide the hammer, nails and lumber to be rid of this nuisance.

It really is not right to get on here and talk about Christian or any other people like that. You obviously hate Christians and feel like they are the devil or something, hating everything and everyone else that is not Christian. This has nothing to do with the bible or God being in schools. Individuals believe what they believe and if they believe in God or anything else, that is their belief when they die and they have faith in that. I just do not think it is right to get on here and automatically assume all Christians are bad. Just because we follow the bible, and try to live a faithful life, does not make people bad. We are all mourning this tragic event in Newtown, CT. No one is trying to force kids to follow the Christian Bible. Where did you even read that?

I agree Kyle. I do not want to be left as a sitting duck. What good is it to have all the illegal guns on the streets with the criminals and they know none of us have guns. They are going to think they hit the lottery!

Yeah we know the gunman wasn't a student. We also know there is no reason for a civilian to own a semi-automatic weapon. Do you know that?

I agree with you. Although some of us are Christians, and some of us own guns. The real issue here is that we do not know why this guy did what he did. We can assume, but we will never know. Putting cops in school might deter some people, but if a killer wants to kill, he will find a way. Same with religion...We can have religion in school, but if the devil wants in, he will get in. I am a Christian, but I do not try to push things on people and I understand religion is a touchy subject. BD is right that there is no answer to this tragedy. Cops in schools will not stop it, religion in schools will not stop it, and actually the number of mass shootings is the same now as it has been for 3 decades. So, religion was in school that long ago, and mass shootings are still at the same number. FYI

A response the NRA, feared by all in government, would love. Wyatt Earp and the OK
corral in every school, theatre and mall.

Wow, I am truly amazed that someone on the Left has now blamed Ronald Reagan for this tragedy. NE12Ukid has gone into the Wayback Machine and conjured up visions of mentally ill people being thrown into the streets by Reagan. Therefore, in NE12Ukid's politically twisted mind, had it not been for the evil, cold-hearted Ronald Reagan, the guy who caused this tragedy would have been incarcerated in a mental institution and would not have done what he did. NE12Ukid comes to this conclusion without truly knowing the mental state of the perpetrator of this crime. So, Reagan ultimately was the cause of all of this. What a crock of Left-Wing BS. The only truth is that many mentally ill people were removed from hospitals and asylums and set out on their own. BUT, that happened because of several court cases. The most critical one was a Supreme Court case in 1975 (Newsflash to NE12Ukid - Reagan did not take office until 1981) called O'Connor v. Donaldson. The court ruled that someone may not be incarcerated in a mental institution against their will unless they are a danger to themselves or society. To do so would be a violation of their basic civil rights to liberty and as a result many people who had been thrown into these institutions were set free. The ACLU declared a vistory regarding this case so it MUST have been a good thing NE12Ukid.

Notice that the Father had the "normal" son while the Mother was left with the "troubled" son. 2 parents would have made a diff in my opinion - that is, a support system in place. On the guns - she was a fruitcake too and the ex should have stepped up. just my opinion

God is not one single religion.

They have ID's in the Seneca Valley district but students are not forced to wear them. I really think that they should as we need to know who they are and quickly identify people (kids) who should not be in the school.

I agree, "God" does needs to return, but not conceptually in our schools and at home, but rather to provide proof that he/she/it exists at all, and to set matters straight on all kinds of things. Not by whispering into your mind but not mine, but talking to EVERYONE at once and delivering his/her/its message to end controversy, tell Muslims and Christians and Atheists and everyone else what he/she/it wants at the same time in an undeniable fashion.

If he's all-knowing, he would know the human race needs this at this stage in our development. Thousand year old books has long-since been too little to go on.

Until this happens, "God" is simply a vague, archaic concept open to countless interpretations and exploitation, and cannot be considered if we want to truly address the ever-growing number of problems in our world with tangible, implementable solutions and not thought policing and threats of what will happen when we die. The answer isn't "fear of God" and "prayer," which have been shown to be ineffectual at best, but action as a society on how we right this ship before it's too late.

Sorry your son has such problems, thank you for doing all you can to help.
But some mental illnesses that result in these violent behaviors don't manifest until the person is older, so someone under 18 might be "completely normal" and then become mentally ill in his 20s or 30s.
My friend's husband was like that. Received care, and meds, but to no avail.... in a lucid moment he killed himself, knowing that he would otherwise eventually harm his wife or someone else. So that story ended in a suicide, it could have ended in a mass killing tragedy like Sandy Hook.

Exactly. A way to show how they have been "corrected" in our correctional institutions which do nothing of the kind except make money for private organizations, so the prisoners can make a case to apply for parole.

There is not going to be a quick fix. I cannot honestly think of how this situation can have a quick fix. By the way, they are called "cons" because of the word convict. I just was not sure if you knew that. Some "cons" really do become rehabilitated. They do not all stay "bad." Just FYI

No anger here. I do have a problem when blind followers of anything trying to tell me what I should believe and how my children should be indoctrinated into your personal belief system. I assume you would react the same way if I told you that you couldn't raise your children as Christians because I don't believe in your religion.

You can believe any damn thing you want and I won't say a word. Just don't try to tell me that your belief is the only true belief and my kids have to read the bible in public schools.

No one is angry with people who believe in God. What a simplistic statement that is. It's wonderful when there is faith and hope in a higher power as well as a strong community that is created out of mutual beliefs. However, when these communities begin to spread hate, intolerance, and ignorance directed at people who think, feel, and believe differently than they do is when there becomes a problem. That is when people become "angry." This is about innocent children and educators who were brutally murdered, slaughtered in their peaceful little New England school. Now is the time for love, acceptance, and understanding, and yes, faith. Faith in a higher power as well as faith in each other!

Maddie, it is obvious from this post, and the earlier one, you do not understand what you reject.

I'll leave it at that for now, not wanting to get into a serious debate here. The key to unravel your position, "... people who believe in God ...." This is not the issue, and nobody is called to believe in God.

I pose the same questions to you, as I have others who have taken such a position: What do you believe and why? What is the foundation of your belief system for matters of life, faith, and eternal destiny? What forms your worldview? I am not looking for answers on the negative side, "what I don't believe," rather the positive side.

Kids aren't allowed to play cops and robbers and cowboys and Indians anymore. They get shot at if they have a toy gun, other people look at your with daggers if you purchase a plastic gun for your boy, It isn't POLITICALLY CORRECT. So when they become adults they play cowboys and Indians for real, with real guns. They must be lacking something.....

I agree with you 100%. I believe armed officers or guards is the only way to go. It is the only way to protect our teachers and students.

Agreed, Oren. The model of the professional School Resource Officer, that is a sworn officer, part of the local police department and dedicated to the local schools, seems to be one that was tried and grant funded here in Pa. in the years following Columbine, but seems to falling into disfavor or being discontinued. I'm doing some more research on this, as the SRO model functions very well in Colorado, as one would expect.
Hearing on the scanner that a lot of local police departments are making appearances at their local elementary schools. One would hope this is part of a renewed commitment to provide professional, responsive service with an eye toward cooperative arrangements between local governments and school districts, and not just for 'security theater'.

Totally disagree Oren. Adding more guns into the mix would just compound the problem. Put God back in the schools and watch the difference!

The safety and security of all children and staff is of utmost importance to us. Policies and procedures have been put into place to limit access to buildings for parents and visitors alike. While these measures seem restrictive in nature, it is times like these that cause us to realize their necessity.
As a district, we continuously review and revise our security plan. Principals are required to review our plans with staff to ensure we understand what to do and when it needs to be done. The Facility and Maintenance Departments conduct routine inspections of the buildings to confirm systems are working.
The school board has continually supported financial commitments in the area of security. Capital Improvement Plan addressed purchase of cameras and entrance systems at our buildings. The annual budget provides funding for our services, within the school day and beyond. The local police departments also provide valuable resources as appropriate.
The Baldwin-Whitehall School District takes the security and safety of our students and staff seriously. Even though we have many measures in place to accomplish that goal, we can always do better. The recent events make us realize clearer than ever that we should never rest on what we have done, but always try to examine how we can make the District better. That is our commitment to you.
Dr. Randal A. Lutz
Superintendent of Schools
http://www.bwschools.net/education/components/whatsnew/default.php?sectiondetailid=1905

Have you ever seen the Security Guards up at Baldwin High School, I doubt any of them would know what to do if someone brought a gun into school. The back doors are open because the students go down to the field or weight room for gym class and they have no security at the back of the school so anyone can enter the school though the back doors.

The security lady at the front of the school has to take care of parents and children entering school or leaving early and watch 350 camera's though the school to make sure the students aren't doing what their not suppose to then suppose to be watching camera's on the back doors that are left open so students can enter and leave to go down to the field. Students leave and enter though these doors to go to Sonoco at lunch time, even drive to McD's for lunch since no one watches the parking lot and students just move the orange cones at the end of the one parking lot so that they can leave and come back in.

Let see, I'm sure someone on the School Board owes someone else a favor so lets hire more Deans of Students and cut more money from our curriculum.

NE12Ukid, I suppose disagreement is considered name-calling. I repeat for your comprehension 2 things. One - You will never have the solution(s) to this problem because nobody will ever know this guy's true motivation. Two, the decision that released people from institutions does not seem to have a bearing on this case. However, it was not a Reagan policy but a civil rights issue decided by the Supreme Court in 1975. Gerald Ford was President then followed by Carter, a Democrat. Believe me, your writings do not require a doctorate in political science to comprehend or to see which way your politcal pendulum swings.

...and yet you struggled so much you missed the point completely and went off on a politically slanted rant. Merry Christmas, bd! LOL

NE12Ukid - Nor does it keep you from ignoring the real facts and claiming that somebody is calling you names or ranting just because a person disagrees with you. In general, making stuff up as you go along. Merry Christmas to you as well.

If you want more specifics, why not contact Dr, Lutz, and ask.

Great, I say!
I'm sure the district could give you some information as a concerned and curious resident. I would imagine that they would not divulge every tiny detail due to the fact that for all they know "NB resident" could be another school shooter planning something. (not really, but you know what I mean).
Perhaps you could ask them to share what can be shared here on the Patch, I'm pretty sure Bob would find room for it. :-)

http://baldwin-whitehall.patch.com/articles/b-w-schools-response-to-newtown-tragedy

IF the funding for pay is there, and IF you find enough RETIRED persons who want to no longer be RETIRED.
Actually, many security guards are retired officers. And many do receive training.
Sorry Kristin, I just do not agree that there is a "SIMPLE SOLUTION!!"
But every little bit might help.

Yes it quite simply is. As I said.. "most" schools already have guards. And I'm pretty damn sure if they don't, most tax payers wouldn't mind a bump in taxes for added security for their children.

And No one would FORCE anyone to come out of retirement. As you said, "Actually, many security guards are retired officers". so Idk why you mentioned," IF you Find Enough Retired persons"... ???

And that's fine if you Don't agree with me, that's your Opinion.

Honestly I'd rather have police officers in school, than arming the teachers. (which some schools are now proposing)

And No one would FORCE anyone to come out of retirement. As you said, "Actually, many security guards are retired officers". so Idk why you mentioned," IF you Find Enough Retired persons"... ???>>>>

There are over 500 districts in PA, each has multiple schools, that's a lot of police to hire to have even one in each school, plus more needed perhaps in larger high schools and for after school activities and such. So I said IF you find ENOUGH retired police who want to no longer be RETIRED. Why is that a problem for you?

Most police officers retire in their 50's and get into security after they leave the force. We also have many people in the military that retire after serving 20-25 years in the military and do security jobs once they get out of the service. There are many people looking for jobs in the security field but the jobs aren't there unless they want to go overseas.

One more point. Many want armed guards at the public schools. How do you teach these children in these schools to trust anybody? The presence of armed guards tells the children to be fearful. It teaches them to rely on a government authority figure to protect them.

What life-long impressions are being laid in these malleable minds about fear, trustworthiness, and reliance upon government?

It would be great if instead of secretly whispering to people in their minds (and conveniently telling them exactly what they want to hear and believed all along), with no uniformity or proof to back it up, if “God” would magically wave his hand in the sky and tell everyone, all at once in a blanket, uniform fashion: “Hey, sorry it’s been like 2,000 years since I told A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE TOTAL in the desert what I wanted everyone on Earth to know, but to clarify, this is what I want, this is the truth, here is what I want you to do. Love, your creator, XOXO – God.”

Once he snapped his fingers and our trance was broken, we could all look at each other and go, “You heard that right?” We’d ALL be in agreement, could hold hands and sing and fall to our knees. EVERYONE would stop debating, questioning, taking God out of school, and the world could unite, and get on the right track.

Instead, we are left to "interpret" (however you feel like on a given day) old and far-fetched stories from the Bronze age, reading “holy books” that full of contradictions and outlandish tales that are copies of copies of copies that have been changed countless times by the ruling elite and clergy over the centuries. Despite this, somehow humans are to blame because we throw up our hands and go, “You know... I think I need a bit more to go on than this.”

"GOD WORKS IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS!" Well, the mystery is the problem. And if he is all-knowing, he would fix it.

Thanks for your response. I was thinking about the tax burden- how much per dedicated officer. At this moment, it seems worthwhile. $75000/year per building? (officer plus training plus equipment) Times the number of buildings. Is it worth it? And it is just one thing, as you say. A lot of good specific ideas are what we need. Ideas about gun control mental health, community involvement need substance and insight and I have heard people saying good, serious things.

Your answer is my solution below. Lift the "gun free zone" designation on schools and let law abiding parents and teachers to be armed if they choose (with background checks of course, maybe even offer them a defense class). It's free and it keeps the element of surprise as there is no single point of failure. If the criminal doesn't know who is armed then it would be harder to plan and execute a mass murder.

John Williams
11:23 am on Monday, December 17, 2012
Thanks for your response. I was thinking about the tax burden- how much per dedicated officer. At this moment, it seems worthwhile. $75000/year per building? (officer plus training plus equipment) Times the number of buildings...

`````````````````
Of course saving a human life is worth any cost, but the money still has to be found.
PA public schools have been hit hard recently by budget cuts.
Pittsburgh has 65 schools and about 30,000 students.
They also had to cut over 300 teaching positions this year.
I just don't see where the funding for full time police officers salary and benefits would come from.
(Pittsburgh SD does have its own school police force, I just used them as an example of the kinds of things to be considered)

Sure, let's just add to the teachers job description, they already, in addition to teaching their subjects, have to monitor kids attendance, take the kids to lunch and breakfast, counsel them when they are upset over some problem at home, check on their nutrition, help their parents understand the homework, put on bandaids, wipe runny noses, check for lice, beak up kid fights, do special programs, etc etc etc. Guess we can just make them cops too. Of course for no additonal pay.

Sure, let's just add to the teachers job description, they already, in addition to teaching their subjects, have to monitor kids attendance, take the kids to lunch and breakfast, counsel them when they are upset over some problem at home, check on their nutrition, help their parents understand the homework, put on bandaids, wipe runny noses, check for lice, beak up kid fights, do special programs, etc etc etc. Guess we can just make them cops too. Of course for no additonal pay.

Sorry, no idea why that double posted.

Michael, I agree with you, teachers that have permits to carry concealed weapons should be allowed to carry guns. Towns in Texas now allow teachers who have permits to carry concealed weapons to carry them in schools. More states need to look at Texas and what they are doing in their schools.

Please just stop talking. Nobody cares about your opinion, and you are loud. It is irritating.

<<Why does it make sense to people to disarm the law abiding citizens and allow them to be sitting ducks if a maniac decides to show up some night at a school event?>>

Because you never know which of those law abiding citizens, includign the teachers, might snap and become the maniac!
Don't the stats show that guns in a home are more likely to be used against the residents than to protect them?

Very well said.

JS & WW,

Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the firearms laws in Pennsylvania.
Then you might have a better understanding of the issues.
http://www.acslpa.org/LAWS-RelatingToGuns-PA-09-02.pdf
You might also understand that it is not law enforcement that determines if, where and when it is appropriate to be armed, that power is reserved to the legislature in PA.

Way to miss the point. Teachers also don't make gun laws, but that didn't stop MSgt. from providing anecdotal evidence about what would make them feel safe.

JS is simply saying if anyone's opinion on increasing the # of weapons available to the general public should be considered, it should be the police and military's opinion. You know, the guys who diffuse situations with weapons daily and have regular training in firearms and handling crisis.

To pretend like there are not unstable teachers who could put people at risk if firearms are introduced into the school environment is naive. There are representative crazies in every sect and segment of our population, and teaching is no exception. In an environment of increasing disrespect by mommy's little angel in Math classes around the country, it would be a matter of time before it was a teacher responsible for the next tragedy.

Finally, I'm sure there are all kinds of Rambo-wannabes out there who think they're the perfect person to have a pistol at the ready. But as MSgt. I'm sure could attest, it takes a special skill set to do the right thing under extreme duress with a weapon in hand. What if they kill the wrong kid in a panic? What if it's not a real gun? Etc.?

I'm going to pray on this for guidance.

@JS--Just curious, what are your common sense laws? All I keep hearing on the news is the Assult Weapons ban. However, CT already has an Assult Weapons ban under the State law, and the gun used Newtown is not considered an assult weapon. Something rarely pointed out in all the coverage. So waht is the common sense law that would have stopped this from happening JS? I don't have a problem with stiffening our laws, but I haven't heard any real solutions yet.

JS, Couple of points here.

1. You don't need to force teachers to carry a gun, you make it an option for those who feel they are competent and willing to do so. It doesn't take a lot of training to learn how to safely handle a weapon if you are interested in doing so.

2. Maybe they could get a local police officer to teach a tactics class to those teachers that are interested in carrying a weapon so they can practice how to react in a situation.

3. Yes, you absolutely let them bring in their own guns since it could be safely assumed that they are comfortable with that weapon.

4. Maybe you don't have to arm anyone in the school but it would make sense to at least remove the "gun free" crap. Why would you advertise the fact that no one in the school has a weapon? Do you have a sign on your house like that?

5. Or maybe we can continue to tell law abiding citizens to disarm so we can't put up any defense for our children. That seems to work so well and I'm sure the cops will be there later to draw chalk outlines around the bodies.

I would like to hear how you would stop a gunman from getting into the school and murdering people. I'll wait for your answer.

PS. I don't want to scare you, but there are armed people around you all the time. In the malls, in restaurants, everywhere you go there are concealed weapons around.

@WW. You say "To pretend like there are not unstable teachers who could put people at risk if firearms are introduced into the school environment is naive"

Can you please tell me what would stop these unstable teachers from bringing a weapon into most of these schools now? If someone wants to come into the school and cause mayhem, how do you plan on stopping them? A guard out by the metal detector is a great start, but why would the gunman not just shoot the guard first and then move about to find more targets.

Michael - I'm fully aware that the legislature makes the gun laws (when allowed to by the gun lobby of course).

As far as educating me on gun laws, the only law I'm concerned about is the one that was allowed to expire. The one that prevented people from owning assault weapons. You know, the ones that can kill 26 people in the matter of minutes. See my post above that talks about the effects of an Australian law. Australia is not that much unlike the US, lots of reactionary cowboys there too, but their law to ban rapid fire guns worked.

I’m sure you have heard of the phrases “in the heat of the moment,” “crimes of passion,” and “temporary insanity.” There are plenty of people who do rash things because their temper got the best of them when they otherwise would never have done such a thing. Jails are full of people with no priors who got angry, snapped, and made a bad decision. It is the theory behind our current wait period to buy a firearm in the first place. If you’re buying it because you are angry or distraught and might do something dumb, hopefully a few days to think about it might cause you to cool off and resolve the situation normally.

So, I doubt a kid is going to make a teacher so angry that they leave, go home, get their gun, and bring it the next day to exact revenge. But if it’s right in that locked drawer, and this kid picked the wrong day to mess with the wrong teacher… It is equally as probable and random as a 20 year old kid shooting up a kindergarten class, isn't it? Because that hadn't ever happened before, either, until it did.

I am not saying I know the right answer here. It is a far more complex societal issue, indeed an American cultural issue, which requires multiple avenues of intervention to try to resolve, and will take years to truly determine if any one measure truly makes an impact. But I feel fairly confident that introducing more weapons into schools on the common teacher is not on the list.

@WW,
I get your point, but the first thing people want to do is pass more laws every time something like this happens. You can ban these rifles if you want, it just means that the person will either get a hold of one illegally or maybe they'll bring in 5 handguns with 10 round clips and kill just as many or maybe more, maybe less. To me, that isn't a solution. The fact is that we trust these teachers with our kids every day and there has to be some kind of trust there that they won't harm our kids. Laws do not stop criminals, that is why they are criminals. It's basic Good vs. Evil and we have to hope that our teachers are on the "Good" side. To think that a teacher is just going to snap and pull out a gun and shoot a kid is far fetched. That teacher could just as easily pick up scissors and go after the kid in that case. You can't "what if" this thing forever or you'll never accomplish anything.

@WW, By the way, there is no "wait period" in Pennsylvania. Background checks are done instantly and you can walk out of a store with any gun in a matter of 30 minutes.

I'm in agreement with you PR; but your response is addressing the individual, not the piece of hardware he used.. Iif you read further on in later posts, JS is talking specifically about the Assult Arms ban, as if re-enactment would be a simple solution. I don't have a problem re-enacting the Assault arms ban, but it would not have applied to the weapon used in Newtown. The solution is not that simple.

That is the question. I understand that VP Bidden will have an answer for us in January. Let's see if he does a similar job with that task as he did overseeing the proper distribution of the Stimulus Package a couple of years ago.

Sracasim aside, the key word in your question is "prevent". To that my answer is none. Say you took away every single gun in the USA, a person bent on such a crime will move on to a bomb, or other lethal weapon that is relatively easy to make or acquire. You will never pervent. The best you can do is reduce the risk.

Your quote: "Thanks gun enthusiasts!" Says just about all that needs to be said about your thoughts on this tragic situation.

Tragic it is.

Can we move forward or are we stuck in the past. As the article states, gun enthusiasts killed a common sense gun control bill. Glad you got my point. Hope we can move beyond allowing these types of laws to be killed by a vocal minority. My point was that the sensible need to stand up and vote in legislators that will act in society's best interest instead of bowing to the pressure of a few. I'm optimistic.

Not to sound cold here, but would you think it was less tragic if he had to carry more magazines? It does not take long to change out a mag on one of these guns. It's even less of a problem when you're facing unarmed victims whose only defense is to hide in the corner of a classroom. Sure there were some teachers that stepped up and tried to stop him, I bet they would have had a better chance had they been armed.

I got your point, and it is the same old same old nonsense. Couch it in any sort of finery you'd like to, but it is the same old useless rhetoric. You have somehow deemed it to be "in society's best interest" to enact "sensible" laws about gun control and/or magazine clip size laws.

The point you seem to miss is that if society truly demanded such laws, they would have been enacted long, long ago.

Oh wait, here comes the drek about NRA Lobbyists, Gun Enthusiast Lobbyists, blah, blah, blah....

The point I made in my original post remains...there is no "sensible Law" that would work to prevent these tragedies.

The was my point Ernie. JS said "sensible". And when asked what Sensible is, the only response he gave was he wanted the Assault Weapons Ban back. The fact is, the state of Ct has an assault weapons ban. The AR-15 is not covered by the CT ban. It was also not covered by the Federal ban (and was manufactured and sold during that period). The AR-15 has been modeled after a military rifle, but is stripped down to fall outside of the banned weapons. The point is, while an Assault weapons ban may be a good start, the former Federal ban and the current State band would not have covered this weapon. It still would be legal and would not have stopped the tradegy in Newtown.

I believe this is more a case of one extremely messed up individual as opposed to placing the blame on guns or violent video games. Video games are played by people of a wide socioeconomic range all around the world. The Sandy Hook events are not the fault of Call of Duty or Halo nor are they the fault of whatever weapons were used. It's tough to assign fault and blame when the person is question is dead and we all scream for justice, but to put the blame of this tragedy on video games is silly.

To answer your question of, "what use is there for any game that awards points for how many people you shoot and kill?", I would say that based on sales numbers for such games, it is endless fun for many people. It's really much more a game of strategy and digital age schoolyard tag than it is of mass murder prep.

Feel free to continue your witch hunt, but I believe you are hunting the wrong witch. Thanks!

These games are not only played by children but adults as well. Even if parents quit buying them, adults would still have them....and children can have access to them as well. You can't control what adults buy. Plus every parent isn't going to stop buying them, and kids are going to play when they get together at a game session......Their house will become the house where all the kids congregate, and you may not be aware that your child is playing it! This is not the answer. What we need is better and less expensive access to mental health care. If you need the services of a mental health professional you may need to pay the entire fee yourself. If you do have insurance you will need to pay a co-pay and the insurance company control how many sessions you may have per crisis, and also how many sessions they will pay for in a year. They will control if you will have in-patient care and how long you can have it for. Depending on the amount of the co-pay.....I know that ours is $30 per session this can lead to a significant cost!

Mary
6:38 am on Thursday, December 20, 2012
These games are not only played by children but adults as well. Even if parents quit buying them, adults would still have them....and children can have access to them as well. You can't control what adults buy. Plus every parent isn't going to stop buying them, and kids are going to play when they get together at a game session......Mary>>>>

Yes, Mary, nothing is perfect.
No parents control their kids, if parents get rid of these games and say NO MORE, all the kids will run to Susie Sniper's house to play, and their parents have NO control over any of them, just like you said.
No, you can't control what adults buy, some adults are pretty stupid.
I guess that's enough reason for you to say "do nothing at all".

I prefer to TRY something that may help not only the mentally troubled youth but any kid. NO KID (or adult) needs to spend their time racking up points for dead bodies.
It's just a sick sick set of values to nurture through these killing games.

FTR, never said destroying all these awful games would solve all the problems, just that it could help, and there's really no sane reason to have such games in the first place.

Okay, so I guess you should ban all books relating to war (or any history of any violent act) then too, because someone might read all those books and get ideas from what they read about. Absurd. Everyone wants someone to blame. This was the fault of one sick individual. Timothy McVeigh used a U-Haul truck to kill what was it, 168 people? Including children in a DAYCARE. So by your logic, we should ban U-Hauls, since one was used in a mass murder. The argument has ZERO logic. Too many people look to "blame" someone when something like this happens. What about placing the blame squarely where it belongs...on the individual. There's a unique concept, huh? Blaming the person who committed the horrible act. But that doesn't make any sense to some people. What proof is there that this idiot even played video games? Yeah, blame the video games. That will make everything alright. To your point about the value in a game where you get points for shooting people, what value is there in ANY video game? How ridiculous.

Are we honestly trying to blame violent video games here? Our culture now is no more violent than it has been in the past. In fact, there are many studies that make the claim that we are actually much _less_ violent as a society than in previous eras.

I am going to go ahead and put it out there that the "we have less morals because of violent video games" is ridiculous. I have never hit someone in anger in my adult life, and I am perfectly willing to admit that I partake in some violent video game playing with my boyfriend/little brother. It is fun. Ever read a trash novel (like any fiction from the bestseller list)? Ever watch a silly comedy or action flick? Same concept except the video game requires hand eye coordination and far more brain cells.

God/religion does not equate morality. Our society is not becoming more violent. Video games have nothing to do with anything.

Even if you are so irrational to believe that violent video games are a gateway to mass murder, there is absolutely nothing that you can do about it. A ban on video game sales will never happen, so it is not worthwhile to even suggest as a preventive measure to mass shootings. Moving on.

Why would you call it elephant in the room, when we ARE talking about it?

A California Act? And how did that have an impact on shootings that happened in CT? It was the Supreme Court Decisions that changed care across the country. The most recent in the 1990's resulted in the closure of most of the few facilites that remain.

Think about it.
Started in 1967 with Reagan, then on to the other dates YOU cited.

RPD

I think your logic is fatally flawed..."this idea is just asking for MORE touble"??? What exactly do you imagine as MORE TROUBLE than an armed man entering a school where he knows he can shoot people until he runs out of ammunition with no fear of anyone being able to stop him???

You are correct, and realism is NOT being addressed in this issue at all.

The first reaction is always "We need more laws (insert they type of Law here) to prevent such things from ever happening again"....I challenge anyone to state a Law that would accomplish this.

The second reaction seems to be "armed guards/armed teachers". Now this reaction at least has some basis in reality, and could actually be implemented. Will it stop these situations from happening? Logic says that crazy people will always be able to do crazy things...however, logic also says that a shooter is much less likely to enter a situation where he might get shot before he can complete his goal.

Extreme, silly example -- I think not. Armed cops make mistakes too.

So, your answer is metal detectors and more security? Using the recent event as example, the shooter shot through the door locks to enter the building and in minutes had killed everyone. What good would a metal detector have done? If you mean more ARMED security when you say "more security", then you might be on to something. Having unarmed security responding to a guy who just shot his way in to the building only would have added one more to the death toll.

I am still waiting for someone to give me some sort of plan that would stop a shooting in progress that does NOT include armed security guards and/or armed teachers.

Don't bother responding -- Ernie must be GOD -- he has all the answers.

Chris, I agree with you wholeheartedly, I don't understand where you think I was dead wrong. Armed security guards are definitely one of the discussed solutions that is a step in a realistic direction.

Hmmmm . . . textbook narcissistic personality disorder.

Ha! What in the heck does opium have to do with anything? Are you saying that video games have some sort of mind altering effect on the player, similar to opium? And now we are condoning a society that bans entertainment? Awesome. Sure. Why not? Lets have the government pre-approve everything that we use for entertainment.

A sane person is not encouraged to murder from a violent video game. An insane person can find encouragement anywhere. Do children get fired up and excited when they are playing these games? Yes. It is called fun. Kids get pretty riled up when they play football too, and that is real life violence that we are condoning! Maybe we should have the government ban football as well.

You know darn well for every shrink that you can find saying that video games increase aggression, I can find five that say video games have nothing to do with mass murders/real life violence.

Why am I wasting my breath (finger energy)? I am going to go shoot some cartoon characters in the face and proceed to have no interest in killing anyone. You keep working on that ban. Maybe someday the government can just make all of our decisions for us from what kind of toothpaste we brush with in the morning to who we sleep with at night. God bless government sanctioned stability.

"If you are unable to see that it is one EXAMPLE of many things that have been banned, then you are just being ridiculous. "

Ha. Exactly. I suppose that I was being too subtle for text based communication...That is the only similarity. The government _could_ hypothetically ban anything. Unless you see some other similarity between opium and video games, then there was really no reason to go on a google fact search for that one, now was there?

These events can be scary, but as I said before, there are plenty of historical studies showing that our society is actually becoming less violent. Google em up. Morality is not declining. violent video games are not eating our souls. "Kids these days" do not have any less respect for their elders than they did fifty years ago (despite all of your personal experiences). Insane people going on murder rampages happen.

I am warming up to the armed guard idea, especially if we can exchange random lockdowns and k9 searches of students that have committed no crimes for one armed guard. Protect the innocent. Do not violate/persecute the innocent. Do not condone government bans on entertainment/games. It is not the government's job to protect us from ourselves or scare us into submission.

"If you are unable to see that it is one EXAMPLE of many things that have been banned, then you are just being ridiculous. "

Erin Conners
7:21 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Ha. Exactly.

Yes, EXACTLY.

Exactly what I said from the start, Chris, there's no one solution, but better IMO to do as many things as possible to help than to sit back and nay say every possibility.
Police in schools is one part, but there is the funding issue. Doing away with these violent killing games is another, stricter gun control may be another, improved mental health facilities or change in commitment laws yet another.
Hug your kids, turn off the violent games, and go visit someone who is alone, or alone but for a sick child or spouse. Isolation is a big factor in setting off these individuals, a kind act can do wonders.