Mike Garrett, former Bridgeport Republican town chair and mayoral candidate, writes in a commentary about school massacres, “The answer, in my humble opinion, is an armed guard, parent or teacher at every school in America.”
When it comes to finding answers to the terrible tragedy that befell 26 innocent souls at Sandy Hook Elementary School one might begin by considering the many suggestions made by people as to what should have been done to prevent this terrible event and what should be done going forward. Having done so, I feel the real and immediate solution has been overlooked.
In Norway, in spite of strict gun-control laws and psychological screening safeguards, Anders Breniak, on July 22, 2011, was able to kill 69 young people attending a youth camp.
Prohibiting something isn’t necessarily effective. Take for instance the “war on drugs,” which is a hopeless failure.
Another illustration from our past history is the Volstead Act, which outlawed the use of alcoholic beverages from 1919 to 1933. This also was a colossal failure.
The answer, in my humble opinion, is an armed guard, parent or teacher at every school in America.
After the massacre at Maalot by Palestinian terrorists in Israel in 1974, which resulted in the death of 22 children at the Netiv Meir Elementary School, real, effective action was taken. Now, volunteer parents and grandparents work in plain clothes at every school in Israel, armed and ready. They received their training from the Israeli military.
Since 1980, there have been 196 school shooting incidents in America, resulting in 302 deaths.
Let’s stop the political hand-wringing.
Just as shepherds protect their flocks and are prepared to kill predators, so should armed advocates for children be ready to use lethal force if necessary against any predator that seeks to harm innocent children.
There was a time when hijacking airplanes was becoming a serious problem in this country. Air marshals were conceived to meet this challenge.
Homeland security forces were born out of the tragedy of 9/11.
All it takes is the training and legal sanctioning of such a force for our nation’s schools. Most of all, it will take the political will to do so.
The armed guard was useless at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas school in Parkland, Florida.
The answer is take the F*cking guns away.
No civilian needs a firearm.
No one needs an AR15, but you F*cking Republicans love tp take gun lobby money while kids get slaughtered.
Pro-Life my ass. Your party just wants to control women, and don’t give a shit about children once they have been born.
DITTO!!
Repubicans tend to be pro-life, not for the purpose of controlling women, but for ensuring that what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a limited privacy right (even in Roe v. Wade) reasonably takes into account the context. Also, Republicans care about the children. Children do better when there are strong economies.
You must know that since Reagan it’s always been the Democratic successor of the Republican president that fixes the economy after the former president destroys it.
If Republicans were “pro-life” why do their actions show different once a child is born?
No Eric, I don’t know that since Reagan, it’s always been the Democrat successor of the Republican president that fixes the economy after the former president destroys it.
I hope Republicans tell their evangelical fan base that they only are anti-abortion due to supreme Supreme Court reasons. That will fly really well. “Children do better when there are strong economies.” ??? For someone with a Bridgeport address in a rooming house I would have expected you to see first hand that Bridgeport children struggle regardless of macro economics. Or do you not live at this rooming house anymore?
You make inferences of matters that you know nothing about. Also, many children struggle, not just Bridgeport children. Your suggestion doesn’t address the point that “Children do better when there are strong economies”.
Just recently in the Buffalo supermarket massacre an armed guard shot at and hit the shooter. He was shot and killed. When the element of surprise at play, how does one overcome that?
You folks need to read my Facebook posts from yesterday.
Shame on those attacking the messenger instead of the message. Read about what my President is doing in El Salvador.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid037mfq1e6qVQCVYzJGaNodgfMeWrFTQR3CG7fBbaJfAypSNPeUVKVQm3bNDfZEx1Lcl&id=1281507948
Garrett is clueless.
He references armed parents and grandparents in Israeli schools, but ignores that fact the Israel has had compulsory military service for the past 74 years for men and women. My late ex-in-laws bought fought in the 1948 War of Independence. Not only are these parents and grandparents fully trained veterans, but there is compulsory annual reserve duty through the age of 45.
We haven’t had an active draft since the Viet Bam War and only a tiny number of teachers and parents gave military training.
Learn history before opening your trap and showing how ignorant you are.
Nam not Bam. Small keys on phone
Marshall you are correct Garrett is clueless. This is just another one of Garretts self-serving attempts to boost his own image. After years of leading the local Republican party he did not have the solution to getting local Republicans elected to meaningful office. What makes him think that anyone would give any credibility to any of his suggested solutions.
Here is something that I think will interest everyone about Mike Garrett. He mentions the Failed War on Drugs. Lets talk about his contribution to the failure. Several years ago Mike had a girl friend who was arrested by Federal authorities for the sale and distribution of crack cocaine. I find it hard to believe that he had a close relationship with this woman and didn’t have a clue as to what she was doing. I ask myself was he possibly involved? Mike Garrett put up his home and signed on as her third party conservator to secure her release pending trial. I ask myself did he do this to keep her quiet about his possible involvement? Mike got her out of jail on bail, did he not think that the half kilo of crack cocaine that she pleaded guilty to distributing ended up in the hands of children. It was probably much more than a half kilo of crack cocaine before the plea bargain. She did her time in Federal Prison before returning home to Garrett. Garrett for many years was critical of Democrats serving on the Town Committee or Elected office who had brushes with the law involving drugs, so what did Garrett do? He allows this girl friend/Federally convicted drug dealer to have a seat on the Bridgeport Republican Town Committee. So lets just say that in Bridgeport politics that Garrett is the Hopeless leading the Clueless.
I know Mike Garrett he has a calm gentle side and has always been a gentleman.
A civilized society, as such, must be expected to monitor, control, and regulate those aspects of life that involve the whole of that civilized society. Certainly, any society that wants to avoid extinction by extermination and/or disintegration/descent into chaos must be willing to figuratively and literally disarm those existential threats that present themselves as such…
Are we too stupid and/or too timid to disarm ourselves of the synergistic, twin threats of unnecessary weaponry and its availability to a too-frequently misdirected and/or deranged populace (e.g., the “general public” of the USA)?!
Yes. Let’s stop wringing our hands and stupidly — disgustingly — allowing an amoral, minority political party to use our cherished democratic system against the majority in the service of a dangerous, destructive, self-serving oligarchy emblematized by the National Rifle Association…
I think, the State of Connecticut has the power to make a law, that would charge back a Gun Manufacture 100 Million Dollars for every person that was killed by or inflicted physical harm to, by one of their Assault Weapons.
U.S. NEWS
Sandy Hook Families Win $73 Million In Lawsuit Against Remington Arms
Remington Arms made the gun used to kill 20 children and six adults in the 2012 shooting at a school in Newtown, Connecticut.
By
Sebastian Murdock
Feb. 15, 2022, 11:38 AM EST | Updated Feb. 15, 2022
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/remington-arms-settles-liability-claims-in-lawsuit-against-sandy-hook-families_n_620bc87fe4b083bd1cc4f7f6?d_id=3169484&ref=bffbhuffpost&ncid_tag=fcbklnkushpmg00000063
We most assuredly should guard the schools – that puts effective first responders on the scene. We all know there are armed guards at many places the public gathers – kinda no-brainer. Two 18 yr olds pull the same deranged atrocity in 10 days. How are these youth being conditioned and broken at such an early age – needs to be explored honestly…and remedied. One remedy to reduce youth violence is getting a father or father figure in all these homes. When investigated, most all these young deranged kids had no fathers shepherding them thru the challenges of youth. Remedy THAT root cause and violence would likely fall to a societal footnote. The driving force is widespread mental illness. And yes, with all these ruined young minds among us, they shouldn’t be able to purchase a gun until they’re 21 yrs old. Sadly, most all this violence is launched in the home. Preserve the nuclear family…………
Dylan Klebold – “Nuclear Family”
James Holmes – “Nuclear Family”
Adam Lanza – “Nuclear Family” he was 17 when his parents divorced.
Dylann Roof – parents divorced, he primarily stayed with father.
Payton Gendeon – “Nuclear Family”
Ethan Crumbley – “Nuclear Family”
This is just a quick look at some notorious shooters. They seem to all have their dad in the home. Of the 128 mass shootings in America from 1982 through May 2022 sixty-eight were perpetrated by White Americans, the next highest was Black Americans at 21. The dog whistle regarding fatherless homes falls flat after a quick search.
No Bob,
respectfully we should feel safe anyplace Americans have gathered in the past assuming they are safe. Schools, churches, community events, business and commerce locations, transportation hubs.
In a time where public trust by many accounts is diminishing, the most recent school mass murder in Texas had State funds authorized for security but not in action when required. Not even entrance and exit points were secured. And many “good men with guns” are seen on TV footage gathered outside the school along with parents and school neighbors yet they seemed not to have a protocol or procedure to follow in the critical time before youths and teachers within the school had been murdered.
Age 18 has become accepted as an appropriate age for granting certain rights. Why? What is the need for the purchase? What community interest or concern have they evidenced in their short lives to indicate their mental and moral state? Just because they can afford the price of admission to a firearm with most serious killing potential, most appropriate to military aggression and with no other citizen purpose for 21st century citizens? Why are background checks and other regulations not part of a rule of law in our nation? Who suffers if the law provides more limits and restrictions and hurdles than today? What happens when gun freedom or liberty conflicts with feelings of widespread safety or security? Where is a compromise that limits this disgusting example of American exceptionalism?
If data indicated that American youth die more frequently through firearm use, misuse, or accident, that is through homicide or suicide, wouldn’t we adults and elected legislators pay attention as we have with childhood cancer, etc. and try to eliminate these shameful results in one or more ways?
You reference “responsible fathers” and mothers? Widespread mental illness? What solutions can you suggest?
Bob, you complete today’s entry with a comment that “most all this violence is launched in the home. Preserve the nuclear family…”
Do we ask Congress to legislate about violence in our homes or to sanction non-nuclear families? Is that your answer? What is the next step here in CT? Did you mean something else? Time will tell.
The root to the violence problem is fatherless homes. It is the foundational problem from which so much misbehavior and violence flow. It is the common element to all the bios of violent men which are revealed. Make a habit of reading the bios when they’re revealed. Think about it, rather than type back. The answer is not to be found in legislation………
The shooter in Buffalo came from a two parent household. Adam Lanza had a father. There is no one size fits all. The guy that did the shooting in the Colorado movie theater had a two parent household.
Please tell me why an American citizen should have access to military grade weapons – in the 30’s you couldn’ t legally own a Tommy gun
Wrong on Lanza – father abandoned the kid to his mother. Wrong on Buffalo as well. Tho I don’t doubt there are exceptions. Your descriptor of the ’30s weapon indicates your unfamiliarity with firearms. The Second Amendment does not pertain to hunting.
He lives with his parents – both work for the state. And I am referring to the Tommy Gun – I didn’t mention hunting. I did want to know why anyone should be allowed access to weapons that can kill with extreme efficiency
I wasn’t clear below – the Buffalo shooter lives with his parents.
Tommy Gun is in the movies and is an automatic weapon. Automatic weapons are banned in the U.S. since the ’50s or so. As to large magazine long guns today – there are many instances where someone defending themselves needs more than six rounds to make sure they hit an aggressor in a panicked situation. There’s a well publicized case from around 2013 where an armed intruder chased a woman and her child into the attic. She unloaded all six rounds on him – five hit him. With five in his body he staggered out of the house, drove his car and crashed a mile away – unbelievable but it happens. They can all argue about numbers, magazine capacity – but the answer lies marginally, at best, in hardware. As you know, the causes are multi-faceted: we don’t commit mentally ill any longer – all on the streets; they’re sending violent criminals back on the streets; red flags aren’t enforced; gun laws aren’t enforced…and on and on. With the deranged kids coming thru our public school system, as I said above, I’m all for raising the gun purchase age to 21. But we’re played for dupes and lied to consistently by our ruling political class – and sadly half the people believe them……..
Tell me why back in the 1960s, the NRA supported gun control?
That’s all the NRA teaches – safe control of guns. They oppose gun elimination….and all the legislative schemes to get there without being explicit. You should spend a few hours checking out the NRA website, its volunteers and its activities. The organization is all about the safe uses of guns – they sponsor endless classes on it which qualifies individuals to be permitted to own guns. As far as I recall in all these tragedies – the shooter is never an NRA member…if they were our noses would be publicly rubbed in it. PS: All the politicians’ BS about big $ NRA contributions to other politicians is all far in the past. NRA donated around $1MM last year – I believe the NRA is technically in bankruptcy today. As I indicated, we are constantly lied to and half the people believe it.
Bob MacGuffie, Mulford Act, a state bill prohibiting the open carry of loaded firearms, along with an addendum prohibiting loaded firearms in the state Capitol. The 1967 bill took California down the path to having some of the strictest gun laws in America and helped jumpstart a surge of national gun control restrictions. Again, tell me why back in the 1960s, the NRA supported gun control?
Did you read my prior comments on the NRA? Did the NRA support Mulford in ’67 – make your point as to its relevance then and today.
Bob MacGuffie, Throughout the late 1960s, the militant black nationalist group used their understanding of the finer details of California’s gun laws to underscore their political statements about the subjugation of African-Americans. In 1967, 30 members of the Black Panthers protested on the steps of the California statehouse armed with .357 Magnums, 12-gauge shotguns and .45-caliber pistols and announced, “The time has come for black people to arm themselves.”
The display so frightened politicians—including California governor Ronald Reagan—that it helped to pass the Mulford Act, a state bill prohibiting the open carry of loaded firearms, along with an addendum prohibiting loaded firearms in the state Capitol. The 1967 bill took California down the path to having some of the strictest gun laws in America and helped jumpstart a surge of national gun control restrictions.
“The law was part of a wave of laws that were passed in the late 1960s regulating guns, especially to target African-Americans,” says Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms. “Including the Gun Control Act of 1968, which adopted new laws prohibiting certain people from owning guns, providing for beefed up licensing and inspections of gun dealers and restricting the importation of cheap Saturday night specials [pocket pistols] that were popular in some urban communities.” In contrast to the NRA’s rigid opposition to gun control in today’s America, the organization fought alongside the government for stricter gun regulations in the 1960s. This was part of an effort to keep guns out of the hands of African-Americans as racial tensions in the nation grew. The NRA felt especially threatened by the Black Panthers, whose well-photographed carrying of weapons in public spaces was entirely legal in the state of California, where they were based.
Bob MacGuffie, don’t believe me look it up yourself.
Case closed, I guess. Good luck with it all. God bless.
The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting occurred on December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut, United States, when 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot and killed 26 people. Twenty of the victims were children between six and seven years old, and six were adult staff members. America will never have real gun control, the NRA has won, here’s why, 20 white babies between 6 and 7 years old were shot dead and America did absolutely nothing, nothing, now we have 19 brown children shot dead and there’s no way in hell that America is going to do anything. Now there’s a call to have schoolteachers to be armed while teaching, there are many more women teachers in America than men, so we want women to be America’s frontline protector.
Having armed officials in schools may be a partial solution. In recent years, there are many more churches with armed ushers. It is known that more churches have such armed ushers but most people don’t know exactly which churches and which ushers. That by itself is a deterrent.
Bob is correct that part of the problem is families with absent fathers.
Some of the issue of increases in violent crimes and breakdown of the nuclear family are observed from the early 1960’s when the Supreme Court ruled out prayer and Bible reading in public schools. In early 2012, months prior to the Sandy Hook shooting, I did an article entitled “The Secularization of Government” which discussed the progression and impacts of several decades of some people attempting to remove God from public schools. The article includes federal government statistics showing spikes in violent crimes, divorce rates and increases in unwed teenage mothers stemming from the early sixties.
What right wing Christian horseshit you spew.
Like you, I am old enough to remember compulsory prayer in the Public Schools.
Unlike you, I am a non-Christian who was forced by government to recite Christian prayers in violation of my First Amendment rights. 500 of the 550 students in my elementary school were not Christian but suffered this indignity and farce.
None of us who were liberated by the 1962 SCOTUS decision became violent, nor have our children. The only students I knew in school who came from a family without a father in the home had had the father killed serving in the Korean War.
In elementary school, I knew only one student whose parents had been divorced. Divorce was hard to get in those days. He lived with the father and his stepmother.
Don’t blame the SCOTUS and enforcing/securing First Amendment rights for the breakdown of the nuclear family of the 1950s.
Government should not have to become secularized, it should have been free from religion from day one. All you right wingers and Red Scare McCarthy nuts even got the Pledge of Allegiance changed to add the words Under God in 1955. Because of that the courts have ruled that public schools cannot force students to stand and recite the pledge. It has to be voluntary.
America of 2022 in no way resembles the Leave it To Beaver idyllic lifestyle of your youth. That was just Hollywood Bullshit, not reality.
Marshall Marcus, we were schooled during the same time period. I don’t remember being forced to recite prayers. That said, are you aware that every session of Congress and every session of our Bridgeport City Council opens with prayer? If you were forced to recite prayers, that wasn’t a First Amendment issue. It was a 14th Amendment issue. The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut were very specific in affirming the Christian faith. At a point in the Constitutional Convention that the debate became very difficult, Ben Franklin stood up and quoted Psalm 127:1; “Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.” As is explained in my article, “The Secularization of Government”, there is no concept of separation of church and state in the 1st Amendment. Also, the statistics are clear that upon the early ’60’s Supreme Court decisions to remove prayer and Bible reading in public schools, there were clear spikes of increases in violent crimes, divorce rates and incidents of unwed teenage mothers. “The knowledge that the promotion of religion and morality was good public policy was a truth recognized not just by the Founding Fathers but even by early courts and Congresses” (Original Intent by David Barton, p. 331). Government officials should not be reluctant to post the Ten Comandments in public schools and government buildings including in the Courts.
Ethan
Thanks for replying, but you are way off base.
You don’t remember being forced to recite Christian prayers in public school. Were you attending my more than 90% non-Christian public school with me? NO.
Was the prayer recited in your pre 196s classes a Christian prayer? If so, it seemed natural to you and you didn’t have to be forced to recite the prayer.
Being forced to recite a Christian prayer by a government employee is a First Amendment issue. Through its paid agent, the Government is establishing religion. It may also be a 14th amendment issue as well.
Tell me Ethan, did you graduate law school and pass the Bar Exam? I did.
Now, as for your ridiculous suggestion that the Ten Commandments be allowed to be placed in public schools, government buildings and courts:
WHICH VERSION of the Ten Commandments? Not only are the Jewish and Christian versions different, but there are two different versions in the Torah (Five Books of Moses or what Christians call the Old Testament).
Which translation should be used. I can sight translate from the original biblical Hebrew and it will differ from the KJV that was written to promote a particular government’s agenda.
Again, as soon as a government agent makes a choice and posts this, it violates the Establishment of Religion clause. And it isn’t Congress that has to make the law, because Federal funds flow downstream so any government action violates the clause,
No member of Congress or the Bridgeport City Council is forced to recite the prayer offered at openings of sessions. Some municipalities are more enlightened than Bridgeport and don’t start government legislative sessions with prayer.
That said, every member of Congress must be at least 25 years of age and every member of the Bridgeport City Council at least 18 years old. These are not first graders being forced to recite a Christian prayer by the authority figure who grades academic work, or may be subject to ridicule or peer pressure by classmates who believe in and recite that prayer.
Mentioning the Fundamental orders of Connecticut is laughable, The colony was a grant of the English King, who was head of the Church of England. Only Protestants were allowed to colonize Connecticut and 1639 when these were adopted predates the First amendment by almost 150 years. The Fundamental Orders were not an act of any part of the non-existent Unites States of America.
The adulterer Franklin’s comments at the Constitutional Convention also have no bearing, as they predate the adoption of the Bill of Rights which occurred after the ratification of the Constitution.
As for your Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc logic about the spikes in all behavior you find abhorrent from the mid 1960s on. It is to be viewed by the adage: figures never lie, but liars often figure.
After Griswold v. Connecticut, one could get birth control legally in CT. The Sexual revolution…remember burn your bra?, the Civil Rights Movements and laws, desegregation, ERA, Anti-Viet Nam War protests? Hell when I was in high school LSD was a legal substance and our 9th grade physical science teacher taught is how to make it. Busing started in 1963 along with other desegregation actions, forever changing America.
There were plenty of unmarried pregnant girls in the 60s. The difference is that society hid them and you didn’t see it. they were shipped off to homes for unwed mothers, or a relative far away. In New Haven, they were not allowed to stay in regular public high school, they were relegated to the Polly McCabe School which was 100% made up of pregnant single teens.
Today we have child care in our high schools.
None of this is because compulsory prayer was removed from the public schools. Statistics showing other causes are available, How many of my friend were drafted and sent to Viet Nam and came back maimed, drug addicts and mentally scarred? Plenty
I graduated high school 50 years ago. There were 200 in my class, half male. 50 were drafted, all non-whites or Hispanic. 25 came home in body bags. We have never had a reunion, it is too painful.
So, Ethan…your post represents many things that are so wrong about the Republican Party.
Marshall Marcus, you have not shown and you cannot show that I was forced to recite prayers in public schools. There is a difference in someone leading a prayer and someone forcing students to recite a prayer.
Also, compelling someone to recite a prayer is not “abridging the freedom of speech”. That would solely be a 14th Amendment issue.
Posting the Ten Commandments does not violate the establishment of religion clause. That clause was intended to prohibit government from mandating a particular religion, not promoting a religion.
You make various conclusory factual claims, many of which stray from the focus of my comments.
I rely on my article “The Secularization of Government” which is available at my website BOOK4Congress2022.org, available at the home page under the section of the four points of Republican ideology, specifically the last point which deals with Republicans generally affirming that we are a Judeo/Christian nation.
I don’t say that the Republican Party is perfect. I say it is the best party!
@Ethan
you conveniently ignored the points in my rebuttal
typical Republican
I never brought up First Amendment Free Speech, I discussed First Amendment establishment of religion. Nice try, but no cigar.
We’ll never agree, your analysis is flawed, just as thinking the Republican Party is the best party, The R chose Trump, McConnell, Abbot, Cruz, DeSantis, Goetz, Marjorie Taylor Green, etc, NOTHING BEST about that bunch of scum.
Don’t bother replying, you aren’t worth any more time……
Marshall Marcus, if you were referring to the First Amendment with respect to the establishment of religion, you then failed with respect to the original intent for the First Amendment.
Also, I don’t have a degree in law, but I know how to read and use a law library. If you are a degreed attorney as you say, one would think your arguments would be more thoughtful and respectful rather than the series of leaps of logic and ad hominem which you have presented.
Now there’s a call to have schoolteachers to be armed while teaching, there are many more women teachers in America than men, so we want women to be America’s frontline protector. Ethan, for real, women teacher armed with guns in the classroom to protect children, teachers have enough duties and responsible as it is plus they underpaid, now you want to add the duties of being a parttime cop. There were19 cops with guns just standing in the hallway doing nothing. The NRA along with Republican Ronald Reagan let the fight for gun control in 1968. It’s amazing how America has amnesia at times.
Ron, although there are many women who are sufficiently trained to use weapons, you craftily infer beyond what is said. Stop!
Ethan, there was no mystery to what I said, you want women to be armed with guns to protect children in schools, you ignore the fact that teachers are underpaid right now and now want want them to provide security with no training and no extra pay or health benefits in case they get shot or injure performing these extra duties.
Ron Mackey, it is no mystery that you infer, conflate and fabricate what you want to see, all to fit your political agenda. What you are attempting to decide with your hipshot conclusion is something that should only be reviewed and decided by open, orderly public hearings. Have a good day !!
Ron, You are correct that Bridgeport teachers appear underpaid today, especially at the entry levels so that were teachers assigned an added responsibility, to become weapon carrying first responders, we would certainly have to pay them more for training time, etc.
And what do teachers say to an elementary school student about the reason for the weapons? Does anyone have a scripted answer, in these days of negating teacher instruction about important historic facts, for the response to a youth? Does the teacher answer heighten or lessen what a student feels and reflects upon? Curiously a silent figure on the ground may be more familiar in urban neighborhoods than suburban ‘hoods and only lead to a conclusion that there are few SAFE places where you can maintain a young fearless mind. Time will tell.
And a parting question to Ethan Book whose discussion with Ron has run him out of space: Ethan, where can we find within driving distance of our homes the “open, orderly public hearings.” that you reference? Sounds like a great idea, but unavailable imo at DTC or RTC meetings locally or regularly. Why is that? Isn’t there an opportunity to make some money from such public display? Why do we allow self-censorship to be imposed? Thoughts? Time will tell.
Hmmm well how do you explain the reduction of violent crime in the 1990s? This was the same time that gangstsr rap was in the main stream which helped to reduce crime. Thanks you NWA!!!!
BptPorter, crime can fluctuate like the stock market. It increased up until the early ’90’s and has increased in recent years. Also notable is that the figures of reduction of crime in the 1990’s factors in the Giuliani administration in NYC.
“Do we ask Congress to legislate about violence in our homes or to sanction non-nuclear families? Is that your answer? What is the next step here in CT? Did you mean something else?” (Unanswered from above.)
Bob,
Just asking questions prompted by your pointing out fatherless homes as the generator of violence, the foundational root: Growing up is difficult with challenges for parents, family and siblings. Violent behavior stems from deeper feelings that call for release, not from the words of the Second Amendment, I suggest. An 18 year old male could not vote nor exercise much citizenship at the time the Founders formed our guiding documents. Why should 18 year olds have access to military aggression weapons unless they are in the military and training? What do you call such “freedom” that when exercised puts other citizens at such profound risk of life and fearful for their safety? Have you given thought to the reason why some photos of the ‘war dead’ in Ukraine become part of a video program, but the young victims of similar war weapons are not shown to the public for a frank response? Is it a matter of taste? Or is it a fear that public outcry will reach such a fever peak that the Senate can no longer impede calls for enacting limits and restricting
weapons? Legislators, if you see something, say something. If you see something, act. Citizens are talking about representatives not listening, just filling space to meet their own needs, and ignoring their constituents. As a Tea Party veteran what are you promoting for action today? Time will tell.