Sandy Hook Shooting Is No Excuse for Gun Control

That's Criminal 87

On Friday, psychopath Adam Lanza shot and killed his mother, then walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and killed 26 people, including 20 children, before killing himself. The tragedy is of mind-boggling proportions, and our whole country is grieving over it. We all are hugging our kids a little bit tighter and thinking to ourselves, that could have been my family.

Then just like clockwork, the anti-gun zealots come out and point to this as a valid reason for the government to limit the size, type, and quantity of firearms free citizens may own. I get it. I really do. I’d be as anti-gun as anybody if I believed that guns killed people. I’d be terrified of spoons too if I thought they made me fat.

A weapon is a tool. It doesn’t go around by itself shooting things up anymore than a knife goes around stabbing people. It’s only when these things are in the wrong hands that we have problems. Bad things happen when bad people are involved, whether guns are used or not.

The argument that we need to limit the number of guns available to criminals by limiting the number of guns law-abiding citizens may own is invalid. I don’t think the insane murderer who shoots up children and teachers and then kills himself cares if owning a gun is illegal or not.

Just because the gun used in this massacre was legally obtained by Adam Lanza’s supposedly “gun enthusiast” mother does not mean that we need stricter gun laws. Citizens need to be able to protect themselves with the same type of weaponry that may be used against them.

Guns exist. That technology is never going to go away. The only thing that would be accomplished by making guns harder to get or outright banning them would be to take away law-abiding Americans’ right to defend themselves from harm as they see fit.

Again and again, we see how guns in hands of the good guys minimizes gun-related crime. Instead of talking about banning guns, why don’t we talk about training and arming teachers or administrators in schools? Or having armed security guards present to protect the children against people like Adam Lanza?

If we’re going to politicize a terrible crime like this, can we at least talk about options that have been proven to work?

Do you think stricter gun control laws would have prevented this tragedy?


Image via another_finn/Flickr

crime, death, education, guns, in the news, law, media


To add a comment, please log in with

Use Your CafeMom Profile

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Comment As a Guest

Guest comments are moderated and will not appear immediately.

belon... belongs2Jesus

ok lets settle this now. guns kill yes they pick themselves up point themselves and pull their own trigger they do.


spoons and forks make people fat yep they do


cars make people drive drunk 


computers make people look at porn


Or people use those items to do those things ig that's true then it's people but let's ban em all 


but then too aren't drugs illegal?

DKs-Kat DKs-Kat

Part 1:

Less than 2% of gun crimes committed are done so by people who obtained the gun legally. The recent school shooting was done by someone who STOLE the weapons he used. He did not get them legally because he is not old enough to do so. NO private citizen can purchase a true assault rifle. They are highly regulated.

A TRUE assault rifle has the capability of having selective fire. It can go either fully automatic which means with one trigger pull the rifle continues to fire or be set to burst which means with one trigger pull a set of rounds are fired, typically 3, before needing to pull the trigger again to fire another set.

A semi auto fires one round only every time the trigger is pulled, ejects the casing and then loads the next round. You must pull the trigger again to fire the next round.

Assault weapons (which is what you are thinking of) (semi-automatic) refers to firearms that possess the COSMETIC features of an assault rifle. Actually possessing the operational features, such as 'full-auto', is not required for classification as an assault weapon. Just because it LOOKS like an assault rifle does not MAKE it one.

DKs-Kat DKs-Kat

Part 2:

You have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, so do I! I have the right to protect myself. I am licensed to carry in the state of Florida. Which means I have undergone a complete background check, have my finger prints on file with the state and the FBI. I carry a semi automatic handgun for my personal protection. I'm well versed in it's use and the laws. If you saw me in a store you would never guess I had a handgun on my person, unless I'm in Georgia where it's legal to open carry :). Florida and Georgia have reciprocity.

It's not people like me you need to worry about. It's the thugs and criminals that you should fear. Criminals don't go about spending the HUNDREDS of dollars, getting finger printed, getting picture taken, getting a background check to get a permit to carry and then go to a reputable gun dealer to purchase their weapons, also costing HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS. They carry them regardless of laws and buy them on the street for next to nothing or steal them.

RESPONSIBLE gun owners are NOT the problem! Any gun laws put in place only pertain to those who will abide by them!

If laws did any good at all, people wouldn't speed, people wouldn't steal, people wouldn't drive drunk. USE COMMON SENSE!

mothe... motherof2inFL

good article.  what happened in newtown is so tragic, but restricting liberties garanteed to americans by the constitution is not the answer.  when the government fears the people, that is liberty; when the people fear the government, that is tyranny (thomas jefferson).  if we limit or strip americans of their right to bear arms, we are in jeopardy of tyranny.  under this administration, that carries even more dire consequences.  imagine if the revolutionists had been stripped of their arms.  american, as we know it, would not exist.  something to think about... 

Julie... Julienikki06

I hear so much about gun control now but why not so much about MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES?! most people who do this have nothing on their record prior to this and "seem" to be normal people who could easily obtain a gun legally..

bleed... bleedingheart8D

There is absolutly no reason for civilians to own and be able to buy automatic or semi-automatic weapons. Gund have one job. To kill. Why are so many people who cliamed o be pro-life ok with with a piece of mental that ends lives? Please explain that to me.

simple frown

Janda Hat

I agree that someone has to be holding the gun for it to do that kind of damage and that not everyone is evil and do the kind of thing that Adam done but that doesn't make it right to have a fire arm so easily obtained. I live in a country that gun laws are quite strict, we don't have ANYTHING like this happening. Arming security out side a kindergarten is ridiculous, and you suggested training and arming teachers and administrators, i see your a mother, would you be comfortable with your children's teacher with a gun in her desk?? and she would have to have it there if training and arming teachers were to work.

miche... micheledo

Pro-life people support the innocent and their right to life.

Pro-gun people support the right of protection.  To protect innocent life from death.

IF I ever had to use a gun against someone I guarantee the person would not be innocent.  My goal would be to save the life of my family.  If a criminal dies in the process, I imagine I would have a very difficult time dealing with the fact that I took a person's life.  But, in the long run, it would be easier to deal with then dealing with the death of my innocent children.

Anna Martin

I don't often agree with Jenny but in this case I do.   Criminals who want to carry out mass assaults don't care if their weapons are legal, so gun control laws wouldn't take weapons away from them.  They would still have guns but innocent civilians would not have guns to defend themselves.  This has been proven again and again, yet no one listens.  Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country and also has the highest rate of murder and gang crime. 

Like micheledo said, if I ever had to use my weapon against anyone it wouldn't be an innocent person.  It would be in self-defense.  If someone breaks into my house, they don't get to do whatever they want to me.  It's my Constitutional right to protect myself.

RMT1995 RMT1995

Using this tragedy to push your party's agenda is disgusting. You are a disgrace to this website.

11-20 of 87 comments First 12345 Last