Skip to main content

Guest Opinion: Sandy Hook and Gun Control. Can Lawmakers Stop the Killings? Comments

If we truly want to prevent further school shootings in this nation, we need to stop fooling ourselves with utopian "feel good" solutions like passing some more anti-gun legislation. We need to look inward and see that, as Pogo famously said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us." Continue Reading

61 - 70 of 99 Comments

  1. Jeffrey Caperton
    2 years ago


    You still concern me with your ideas. Do you really wish to live in a war zone? That is essentially what I envision from those of you who advocate arming educators and the general citizenry. Essential ingredients of civil society include a trained professional military to protect us from threats from abroad and trained professional law enforcement agencies to protect us from threats locally. The minute we begin arming ourselves and taking matters into our own hands, civil society will cease to exist. What you advocate is civilization going backwards, not forward; the very reason we are at this point.

    Raised in a rural area, I fired a number of firearms as a young lad and not once did the idea of pointing a firearm at another person cross my mind. However, it was a time when gun safety was a part of our elementary and junior high school curriculum and cooler heads prevailed in civil debate, for the most part. It was a different time, not always better, but civility was actually a virtue at the time. Therefore, speaking as a former hunter (Actually, the only thing I ever really killed was soda bottles and tin cans, so hunter “wannabee”) trained in firearm safety, I do not believe additional firearm regulation is the key to the current situation, particularly when we consider that the young man in question was carrying firearms that were not even his, so I can think of no law that could have prevented this particular event.

    The one thing we must remember is that the time I refer to above was a different time, a time before current special effects technology were able to deliver death and destruction on the big screen in extremely graphic detail. While I generally do not agree with the way Vance phrases his ideas, he is right about the proliferation of violence via music, video games and, yes, the movies due to the potential to desensitize young people to acts of violence. There are those who will argue that our generation had characters such as John Wayne and Clint Eastwood (For the later boomers), but these movies were a waltz compared to the mayhem delivered on screen today and it seems that there is a competition to see who can deliver the most violence within a ninety minute time frame, particularly with the special effects technology available today.

    However, arming the citizenry given the situation with the media, not to mention the general lack of civility present in our society today or the pressure cooker environment in which many of us work, would only serve to hasten setting off an already ticking time bomb. Therefore, while I do not believe further regulation of firearms is warranted as I believe there are sufficient laws governing the ownership and use of firearms, an armed citizenry is a recipe for disaster and, quite frankly, barbaric.

    While I do not claim to have all of the answers (I often wonder about two and two given quantum theory), I believe a more civil, not to mention Christian, society would be a good start. Simple habits such as the use of good manners, observing simple truths such as the Golden Rule, and a kinder environment would go a long way to thawing the current volatile environment in which we live. What can we expect from a troubled youth when adult males are on fighting in a shopping mall over a pair of shoes? Arming the citizenry or disarming the citizenry will do nothing as long as we live in such a volatile environment that views human life as expendable if there is no utility derived from that human life, and that is precisely where we are as a society today, and arming our educators and the general citizenry, as you suggest, would only serve to put an exclamation point on that.

  2. robert matzinger
    2 years ago

    Obama and his administration have done the best they can to totally remove "God" from public schools and public places, and they have done a good job of it. They have diligently worked to tell the world that "God" has nothing to do with any of our governmental decision making. And they have done a good job of that. But we would expect them to make laws that somehow magically protect our children? Please...................

  3. Emma
    2 years ago

    @Spade ...thank you. That information was nonjudgemental and beneficial, which was what I was asking for.

    In our area most public school districts have their own police force. Officers are armed and immediately available for response. Contrary to what those without this program would believe, it does not interfere with learning. Officers intermingle with students. Communication between students, officers and faculty stops trouble before crisis. Strangers on campuses are checked. There are schools who do not have gun free zones. There are instructors with concealed weapons permits who have intervened and averted just the kind of massacre that has so torn people into roles of combatants on this issue. Information is available on the DOJ website, but it is not widely reported in the press. For those who think outlawing weapons will make them safer, I suggest spending a year in Mexico. After all, their citizens are safe. They're safe because they have laws limiting gun ownership? Tell that to all the dead in that country who were unable to protect themselves from the cartels. They aren't supposed to have guns either. Perhaps we should encourage more of our returning veterans to enter the teaching profession. Those who have been trained in defense and have already shown their determination and acted honorably to stand for our freedom would make excellent role models for our children while they also keep them safe. Vets are struggling to find work, they have their GI Bills to pay for schooling. Their presence would provide reassurance to parents. Just one part of the solution, but well worth considering.

  4. mgm.
    2 years ago

    The right to bare arms was wrote when Americans lived on frontiers with no organize police or even a army of any size to protect their lives and property now it seems to apply in a America where you bare arms to protect yourself from the laid off co-worker reporting to work with his M-1 Garand or the crazy kid or kids down the street or by characters feeling the need to arm and organize themselves believing they are the last line of defense from the Black Helicopters flown by Chinese pilots that carry UN troops to impose world government on us. If the Founding Fathers could somehow see what those words had brought to modern America I bet with their now recently bestowed all knowing demigod status they would have had the wisdom to modify those words so you can still take you kid deer hunting and and maybe even tens of thousands of Americans fell by guns might still be here with us today.

  5. Marianna Sylvia
    2 years ago

    You call yourself Catholics? You ought to be ashamed of yourselves! You will not succeed in convincing me that Jesus, the Prince of Peace, would support the gun lobby.

    And to the author of this essay -- for your information, all of the children who were attacked in China on Dec. 14 survived, precisely because the attacker did not have a gun. So what exactly is your argument?

  6. KarlVDH
    2 years ago

    What would have to be happening in his house for Jesus to draw a gun and fire?

  7. Tom McGuire
    2 years ago

    In Afghanistan, torn by generations of violence and killing a leading parliamentarian and presidential candidate, Ramazan Bashardost, said: "We have to stop justifying killing," he explained. "All the politicians are corrupt and support killing someone, but killing anyone is never justified. We should not support anyone who kills another person. We Afghans need to decide what our human values are," he said, so we can stop the killing, violence, corruption and injustice.

    What if a United States politician or better yet a group of politicians were to say: "We have to stop justifying killing." Such a courageous statement might have greater effect than all the worn out rhetoric of both sides of gun control.

    Jesus told Peter put away the sword. The disciple of Jesus has the freedom to not take up arms to defend his/her or other persons life. The disciple of Jesus is called to make peace and be a witness to Jesus who is peace. Such witness may include death from violent acts. Jesus no where gives us a just war theory, rather He give us the cross, an instrument of execution. The Gospel of Jesus gave has never really been practiced.

  8. Brian
    2 years ago

    Thank you, Karl VDH.

  9. Jeffrey Caperton
    2 years ago


    Is it possible for something bad to happen without you going into attacks against the "Marxist Democrat Party has been waging war against the Constitution since Woodrow Wilson" or anybody else with whom you disagree politically? Is it not possible that the only person to blame in this situation is the person who perpetrated this heinous act? But the bigger question is, why we need anybody to blame at all. All I know in this situation is that young lives were lost in this situation and families are currently looking for answers, and that shouting and waving our fists at one another will not provide those answers.

    I would think that, at a moment such as this, we would be embracing each, united in our grief over the loss of these innocent lives for no reason. Instead, I see people waving their fists in each other's faces and looking to blame somebody, generally those with whom they disagree politically. Somebody has actually suggested arming teachers? What saddens me is that is no less than I expected to find at this website, providing further confirmation to me that nothing good can come from the Christian laity anymore because a City of God cannot be built on hatred. Consequently, I grieve for those children alone and pray for those families, asking God to give me the courage to accept His will. And I blame no one.

  10. Jerry N
    2 years ago

    "if it's harder to get a gun and there are stronger limitations on doing so, and harsher penalties for unlawful posession or use of one... why is that a bad thing?"

    Here's why:

    "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."--2nd Amendment to the US Constitution

    "No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms." ---Thomas Jefferson

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner..Liberty is a well-armed lamb"-- Benjamin Franklin

    "The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition." --James Madison

    In other words, the reason the right to bear arms is in the Constitution has nothing to do with hunting, stopping criminals or shooting sports. Those are side issues that cloud the debate over gun control. The right to bear arms has everything to do with protecting ourselves against the onslaught of government tyranny, both foreign and domestic.

Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment

Newsletter Sign Up

Saint of the Day

March 27 Saint of the Day

St. Rupert
March 27: Bishop and missionary, also listed as Robert of Hrodbert. A ... Read More