Honoring Navy Yard Victims, Obama Asks: ‘Do We Care Enough’ to Change?

President Obama on Sunday eulogized the 12 victims of the Navy Yard shooting and lamented what he called a “creeping resignation” in America about the inevitability of gun violence.

The question is not, he said, “whether as Americans we care in moments of tragedy. Clearly we care. Our hearts are broken again. The question is do we care enough?”

“It ought to be a shock to all of us, as a nation and a people,” he said. “It ought to obsess us. It ought to lead to some sort of transformation.”

...the 12 victims of the Navy Yard shooting and lamented what he called a “creeping resignation” in America about the inevitability of gun violence.

As long as we have these idiotic ... no, criminally stupid "gun free zones" which are obviously and demonstrably NOT "gun free" we will continue to have multiple homicides by firearm. There is a reason every single mass shooting (except one, can't remember which) in the last 40+ years has taken place in an area allegedly "gun free."

WAKE THE {EXPLETIVE} UP AMERICA! So called "gun free" really only means "defenseless victim zone." Do not be a victim! Consider these simple, irrefutable facts:

Guns are a reality in America. Even if you could ban them and get rid of them without starting CW II (not likely IMHO) why would you want to? Crime statistics show that where private firearms ownership is banned or severely restricted violent crime increases. So anyone advocating for "gun control" is knowingly or not advocating for more violent crime. More assaults, more rapes, more murders.
As long as there are criminals, they will have guns. It absolutely does not matter what laws you pass, criminals will break them. If it were as simple as making something illegal, there'd be no more illegal immigration, no drug problem, no drunk driver problem, etc. etc. Criminals will always have firearms. Anyone advocating for "gun control" is really talking about disarming victims, not criminals.
Given that criminals (and thus anyone, including the insane) will have access to guns mass shootings, or attempted mass shootings are a fact of life. They are going to happen. The only way to mitigate the negative effects is to end them as soon as possible, before the body count is racked up. The only way to quickly and effectively stop a whack job with a gun is for someone else with a firearm to take them out. Cold, cruel, but a fact of life.

It is my considered opinion that anyone and everyone that is advocating for "gun control" is seriously lacking in common sense and is willfully ignorant of the facts. If they are aware of these facts and obvious outcomes, and advocate for "gun control" anyway, then they themselves are mentally disturbed and are willfully trying to inflict pain, suffering, and violence on their fellow humans. Every time a shooting takes place in a "gun free zone" I would hold every single person responsible for enacting and continuing the idiotic "gun free zone" accountable as an accessory to the shooting. They are aiding and abetting the act.

Every time I hear someone like odumber say something along the lines of "military style weapons don't belong on the streets or in the hands of civilians" I think we need to step back and ask the obvious question: why not?

Are we not doing R&D and using our technology and experience to produce the best weapons possible for our military forces? Of course we are. Fine. Why would anyone want to deny me, you, and our fellow law abiding citizens the opportunity to have the best tools and technology available to defend ourselves and our loved ones? Why...no how can anyone reasonably argue that we should intentionally place our citizens at a disadvantage when they may be trying to defend their lives, their loved ones lives, or even some stranger they witness being attacked?

How could anyone in good conscious advocate for such a course of action? Hey, why don't they say "Seatbelts save lives, but we're only going to put them in military vehicles. The rest of you get lap belts and good luck, that's good enough for you." Or hey "Our best trauma care goes to the military hospitals, the rest of you can make due with 50 or 100 year old technology." Who are these people, anyone really, to say what is "good enough" for me and to intentionally limit me and my ability to defend myself? By what twisted logic can they morally defend that? It can't be done.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.