WATCH: Tearful Obama Responds to Newtown School Shooting

President Obama delivers a statement from the White House on the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT.

For the latest updates on the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings, visit sister-site Newtown Patch

Francie December 19, 2012 at 12:29 AM
Oldprune: I am amazed by your unintelligent comment. I don't know the President personally, but I do know he is a good family man and cares about the poor and middle class. BTW: Obama was against the war initially. It was the Bush administration that charged 2 wars on a credit card. Oldprune, get your facts straight. Also, please stay on topic and keep politics out of this horrific nightmare. Enuf said!
Francie December 19, 2012 at 12:40 AM
Vito: Enough bragging of owning guns, you might wish you didn't. Your guns could be used against you by a disgruntled family member as in Ms. Lanza's demise.
GammaUt December 19, 2012 at 12:45 AM
Mariana, that's silly. The constitution doesn't protect freedom of speech in the medium of print alone. It protects TV, film and the Internet. We can't read one amendment with a ludicrously narrow interpretation and another with a broadly expansive one.
GammaUt December 19, 2012 at 12:57 AM
Greg, California law does not require that firearms be locked up. However, if someone, such as a child, gains access to this firearm and causes injury or death, the owner of the gun will be charged with a crime.
John Herby Hancock December 19, 2012 at 05:02 PM
Michael W I'm not looking at this from a California perspective I'm looking at this Nationwide! I don’t think it really matters who makes money from the manufacturing of guns! Guns are not the problem; people who don’t respect the guns and keep them safely are the problem! I guess we should be watching you because I see you as a bit of a nut job who just wants to fight and point out flaws rather than open up useful conversations on how to better the current US gun laws.
John Herby Hancock December 19, 2012 at 05:26 PM
GammaUt I think we do have to accept that there will always be gun related deaths in the US. Just as we have accepted there will be auto related deaths, motorcycle deaths, deaths from smoking, and so on. What we do need to do is have all sides of this debate come together and work on a sensible solution. I believe the solution rests in the hands of the gun owners. As gun owners we have to stand up and take responsibility for our guns being secured at all-times unless they are in our control. Will this stop all the accidents and wacko shootings? No, but if we make it harder for other people to get their hands on our guns the number will go down. I'm all for people having CCW permits and gun ownership; however I'm not sure all people who have guns or are currently purchasing the guns are ready for the responsibility that goes with them, this is a huge failure in the system. People who are going to buy a gun need a lot of education prior to their purchase so they can truly understand what gun ownership is about and all of the responsibilities that go with it. You have to learn how to drive a car and you should also have to learn how to handle a firearm. The purchasing of a firearm is a lifelong commitment to safety and we need to be teaching this prior to purchases. We should also have to prove yearly we are still qualified to own and or carry a weapon, just as we have to renew a drivers license.
Gregory Brittain December 19, 2012 at 07:51 PM
One idea I heard mentioned only on “Red Eye,” the media should not mention the name or show the face of the perpetrators of these incidents. The media should not delve into and broadcast the perpetrators’ real and imagined grievances with their family, employer, school and/or the world. While these incidents have to be covered, if we do not give fame, notoriety and attention to the perpetrators, there would be less incentive for the “nuts” who want to go out in a “blaze of glory” to perpetrate these incidents. In addition, while these incidents are news and have to be covered, it does not have to be 24/7 coverage, [in part for political reasons to gin up support for depriving Americans of their Second Amendment rights]. By analogy, when someone runs onto the field at a sports event, the TV broadcasters do not show the incident to minimize the incentive for such incidents. While running onto a field is trivial compared to killing people, I suggest there is a relevant analogy regarding the effect of publicity or lack thereof. I think for many of the perpetrators the publicity and broadcast of their real and imagined grievances is incentive to engage in these types of incidents. Will minimizing the publicity to the perpetrators stop all such incidents? Of course not. However, the more incentive there is for a behavior the more of it you get. The less incentive there is for a behavior, the less of it you get.
John Herby Hancock December 19, 2012 at 08:15 PM
Mariana Zuelsdorf December 19, 2012 at 09:34 PM
@John Herby Hancock. May I ask about your Patch profile photo? If that is suppose to be Christ, cocking a imaginary gun and saying 'thumbs up', I think it is rather tacky considering the current situation. Or actually any situation.
Gregory Brittain December 20, 2012 at 06:03 PM
I commend you to “Conscience, Not Guns,” by Dennis Prager http://www.dennisprager.com/columns.aspx?g=42452f97-f8e4-475f-98c9-0083811664c4&url=conscience-not-guns-n1469001 “My stepson is autistic, and is not capable of attending regular school (much less honors classes) or driving a car, things that Adam Lanza did fully normally. But my stepson is keenly aware of right and wrong, and believes that God punishes people who commit evil.”
John Herby Hancock December 20, 2012 at 06:04 PM
Mariana - That's not what it is at all. It's a picture of Jesus pointing at you and giving the thumbs up. I've had that picture up forever. People will twist things anyway they see them. I actually think Jesus would be ok with guns.
Francie December 20, 2012 at 06:22 PM
John Herby Hancock: NOT! You are only assuming Jesus would be ok w/ guns.
Mariana Zuelsdorf December 20, 2012 at 06:41 PM
Thank you , John Herby, for the explanation. I had never seen that picture before and just noticed it. I think you are writing on Roseville Patch, and I'm on the Banning-Beaumont one. No intended twisting at all. It's just an unusual photo so I asked about it.
Watts December 20, 2012 at 07:13 PM
It's from Kevin Smith's film Dogma
Roberta Hubbard December 21, 2012 at 03:59 AM
Appreciate where you are coming from, John Hancock. Thanks for your input.
Roberta Hubbard December 21, 2012 at 04:12 AM
Woe, I agree with you, Francie, Jesus would not be o.k. with guns. Talk about twisting things...(John) It was the Catholic church which stood against going to war in the middle east this day and age, and I found my beliefs to be in alignment with the Catholic church at that time totally. When all other options are exhausted, or sought for and tried then war should be the last resort. Impatience and injustice is a cruel and inhumane answer to using guns and war to annihilate people.
Roberta Hubbard December 21, 2012 at 04:37 AM
I don't agree, Gregory. I mean the public wants to know and support the grieved persons and family. By telling over the news media, so many people come to help and want to help in these situations. It's more about care....I believe it strikes the hearts of people where people can and could sympathise with the public and each other. We need to know and feel with one another, and by ignoring such incidences like this really is cold and keeps people unfeeling for what's going on. Now the freakos who like the publicity of their madness?? Most of them don't live to find out. So I don't think it is really the publicity that they are so concerned about, but they get their rush when they do the damage that they do, sad to say. Really, bad people do not get "famed" or "notoriety" by the news coverage at all. That is not the news coverage purpose either. The main motive or incentives for murderers is not going to be about news coverage, but a lot more is going on than that. Therefore not to cover these atrocities would be wrong. It is important for people to learn from each and every danger at least to be more aware of what is happening and to try to help avoid other similar situations. This can't really be done if they are all kept in secret.
Watts December 21, 2012 at 09:01 AM
Hey Roberta, wake up and just read the posts immediately above. This is somebody's profile photo and has nothing at all to do with the issue being discussed. In fact, as I pointed out on behalf of John, the image is from a Kevin Smith film called Dogma, which has nothing at all to do with guns. You are getting upset over something that doesn't exist in the real world, but only in your misunderstanding of what a profile icon is.
John Herby Hancock December 21, 2012 at 04:53 PM
Roberta I believe you are the one twisting things here. I never said anything about war! Guns have many legal uses such as hunting, sport shooting, and range shooting. With that said guns are used in war; wars were fought with guns so you could give your opinion on my post. Guns are used in the war against crime to keep you safe in your house at night and your travels during the day. I have a son who is a police officer and he is at war for you and your safety and the safety of your loved ones each day; so you’re welcome for his service and my worrisome nights. As I have showed guns have many good uses and are a great tool for those of us who use them correctly. I’m sure Jesus has no problem with guns because it’s just another tool he has given us to hunt for food, relieve stress and yes go to war WHEN necessary to protect or rights, religions, freedoms, and beliefs. I urge you to say thanks to a vet for going to war to protect you and other countries for the reasons mentioned above. I would also urge you to thank your local police for carrying a gun to protect you and your loved ones. Above all else please look at the picture; it Jesus pointing at you smiling and giving you the thumbs up.
Francie December 21, 2012 at 11:35 PM
Izec: You are totally off key here. It was the Bush administration that got the U.S. into two wars the U.S. paid for on a credit card, not President Obama. Our troops and families of our troops are continuing to suffer the effects of the Great Bush Administration. Get your facts straight.
Bwood December 22, 2012 at 12:20 AM
" As I have showed guns have many GOOD USES and are a great tool for those of us who use them correctly. " Where have you shown THAT, and what is the "correct" usage of a gun? "Guns have many LEGAL USES such as hunting, sport shooting, and range shooting." What purpose does a gun have OTHER than killing something or someone?
John Herby Hancock December 22, 2012 at 01:48 AM
Brood You really are ignorant. GOOD USES - HUNTING (last time I checked its legal) TRAP SHOOTING (very relaxing you should try it some time no killing involved) HANDGUN TARGET SHOOTING ( also very relaxing again you should try it also has no killing involved) PROTECTION ( from criminals and nut jobs armed with a GUN KNIFE BARE HANDS OR ANY OTHER WEAPON Killing is involved I would not recommend this unless absolutely necessary) PROTECTION (from invasion of foreign countries) CORRECT USEAGE - see above. Since you seem to be simple I will note correct usage for any of the above requires practice, even the killing part. If I have to protect myself my family or you I want to have spent plenty of time target shooting so I hit my intended target and ONLY my intended target. You're welcome! Purpose OTHER than killing - see above
John Herby Hancock December 22, 2012 at 01:55 AM
Bwood - sorry I addresses the above to brood. I'm typing on my phone and due to your simple nature I wanted you to understand the response was for you.
Roberta Hubbard December 22, 2012 at 05:57 PM
It's interesting how the use of guns are so "lega"l. Where those of us who would vote no to hunting and killing animals don't get a voice, but the ones who want to hunt and kill do, and it is legal. It is legal for factory farms to torture, maime and kill animals in the name of feeding human consumption. The brutality of man and his defense to protect his selfish wants and desires without a thought of respect to life of other animal beings is atrocious. I for one do not eat animals or their milk, ect...therefore I do not participate in the killing of any kind to support me. It is a shame that their is so many rights justified by law to support killing, and part of the 10 commandments even declared do not commit murder. If gun control were not an issue then why are we having such an outbreak of gun murders in the U.S.? What some people call a hobby and sport to use guns others would object, because they don't find it relaxing, but loud and dangerous. This type of sport endangers all living beings who might be in the way. And how many people with guns or rifles kill wild life just for the fun of it? Birds for instance? Smaller critters and the such by which they declare has no value to it's own life? I have heard of someone and his wife go out and shoot coyotes just for practice of hunting so they can better get a deer later. Shameful. Legal, yes. Shameful. And we wonder what has become of the psyche of our nation.
Roberta Hubbard December 22, 2012 at 06:18 PM
John, I do support law enforcement and the use of guns, or at least carrying one for the sole purpose they are required to do for their job. It is legal. I am glad for the police and the work they do. But not everybody else who has easy access to these guns by which our police force uses to help "protect the public". What is legal to our police force is now too easily accessable to others who are outside law enforcement. That is what does not make sense to me, and that is why I believe in better gun control. I used to live in Oregon where I played co-ed softball with police men and their wives...they were my buddies, and I have much respect for their line of work. It is the guns used so wildly and freely that baffles us all, and needs to be controlled. It's bad enough when we find out that someone with credentials to use guns goes bonkers and kills innocent people. So why the argument against better gun control by you gun owners? You would think you too would be concerned about this epidemic rather than keep fighting for gun rights.
Bwood December 22, 2012 at 07:35 PM
I would return your ignorance remark in kind, except in your case it would be an insult to ignorant people. How many times a year for instance would you say you practice protecting the country from invasion from foreign countries? (Clue - it's not working very well! We have millions of undocumented aliens here in the state right now!)
Gregory Brittain December 23, 2012 at 06:22 PM
"Gun control now and forever" Thank for your honesty. "Never let a good [tragedy] go to waste."
Gregory Brittain December 24, 2012 at 09:42 PM
In Hoc Anno Domini http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324461604578195251401168178.html?mod=opinion_newsreel
Gregory Brittain December 26, 2012 at 09:39 PM
Hard Newtown Questions “Another polarizing gun control debate won't prevent the next mass shooting.” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324907204578187412604319142.html?mod=opinion_newsreel
Greg Coppes December 26, 2012 at 11:45 PM
Thanks for posting, how did I miss that article. I have been to busy reading the stuff put out by the gun grabbers I guess.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something