National “Guns Save Lives Day” Moved.. to December 15th

National “Guns Save Lives Day” Moved.. to December 15th
21 comments, 10/15/2013, by , in LOCAL, NEWS, NEWTOWN

“Guns Save Lives Day” has officially been moved from December 14th to December 15th this year.

I have a very unpopular view in my family.  I hate guns.  I HATE guns.  My brother finally stopped sending me statistics about how “guns save lives” about three months ago when I told him he had to stop or I would unfriend him on Facebook.  Speaking of Facebook, all the people who “check in” at firing ranges or post pictures of their new “cool” guns in my eyes are lunatics.  That’s enough for me to hide them from my feed.  It’s one thing if you’re a responsible gun owner and keep your views to yourself.  It’s another to brag about the fact that you and your significant other are having a date night firing guns.

How romantic.

One day I’m going to post a picture of samurai swords and brag about how much fun I have stabbing mannequins in my back yard.

Given this absolute hatred of guns, I almost lost my mind when I learned that there is a group called the Second Amendment Foundation that planned a “Guns Save Lives Day” on December 14th.  In case you’ve had too much tequila today (and honestly, who hasn’t?) December 14th is the one-year anniversary of the Sandy Hook tragedy.  Obviously, I’m extra sensitive to this date since I’m from Connecticut and was so close to the events.  I just don’t understand how there can actually be  a group of people that PURPOSELY chose that day to tout their stupid agenda.

They selected that date to gain media and national attention (which they did because we’re all idiots and love to talk about controversy) so it seems fitting that now that they’ve sucked out all the attention of having an event like that on the anniversary, they’re changing it.  Because the people of Newtown (and every other normal person on Earth) complained to them.   They have been so kind to reschedule the “celebration” for the following day.  December 15th.  Really? Like March 27th wasn’t available for your stupid rally?

They issued this statement:

“Guns Save Lives Day is on December 15, 2013, Bill of Rights Day, the day after the Anniversary of Newtown. We plan to honor these victims by doing everything within our power to prevent misguided gun control laws from leaving Americans defenseless or worse victims.”

Clearly I’m a fan of freedom of speech.  Hell, that’s what we do here- Rant and rave about whatever nonsense we feel like. So, if they want to scream about how cool AK-47’s are, all the power to them- but when do we just all become human and not do things like that on the anniversary of one of the darkest days in our nation’s history?

If they thought for one second their “Guns Save Lives Day” was going to change my mind about my hatred of guns, they’re sadly mistaken.  Actually, it just reinforces my beliefs.  I don’t think more guns will make a safer society.  And I certainly don’t think pushing that idea on the day AFTER 20 children and six educators were slain is going to go over well either.

Hope they enjoyed all that media attention.  Now, back to finding a samurai sword so I can create that Facebook post…

 

Source: NBCConnecticut

Photo: (c) iStock/Thinkstock

About Zaps

21 comments
xRegardsx
xRegardsx

@AnnaZapOnAir You should def read the comments on your rantings... might learn something. http://fyre.it/9wiBPJ.4 

@xRegardsx You and my brother should hold hands. Trust me, I get enough of this. Although I appreciate your input, I just disagree. Sorry!

@AnnaZapOnAir This isn't even just about firearms. You blatantly lie to your audience by twisting someone else's words. How is that okay?
But you'd rather tell yourself you understand when you don't... only hearing what you want to hear... twisting people's words.
If you appreciated my or anyone elses "input" as more than just traffic to your post... you'd attempt to actually understand.
Choosing to avoid understanding = choosing to be ignorant = choosing to be close-minded. How can you be proud of that?
It doesn't matter how much you get... what matters is that you choose to ignore and CHOOSE to avoid understanding.
You disagree with valid logic and conclusive evidence. Well that's nice. Do you really just skim and cherry pick the comments?

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

Talk about putting words in someone's mouth and exaggerating...

"We plan to honor these victims by doing everything within our power to prevent misguided gun control laws from leaving Americans defenseless or worse victims.” 

IS NOT THE SAME AS

"So, if they want to scream about how cool AK-47’s are,"

How do you directly quote them and not understand what is in clear English?

Why write this post if it's based on a poorly fabricated fallacy?

What does this post of yours offer the world? How is it at all productive for anyone but your own ego?

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

A gun in the hands of trained and safe good guy makes him safer against a bad guy with a gun. I'm pretty sure those around an armed good guy are also safer... seeing as the police officer is minutes away when seconds count.

I'm pretty sure that counts as a "safer society".

Should learn to back up your assumptions as well as understand the need to refute the arguments against your own. "I don't think yadda yadda" is not a good argument... especially when it's clear you have no understanding of what you're arguing against.

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

Did you ever stop to consider the actual purpose of choosing that date? You know... trying to understand the opposition without your bias before opening your mouth? Playing devil's advocate to yourself so you can at least show that you understand what you're arguing against?

Since it's apparent you haven't, let me explain the justified reasoning.

Politicians know how to manipulate the public's opinion by pandering to their emotions. "Won't someone think of the children??!?" becomes an easy platform to launch an ego-stroking agenda as anyone with mediocre critical thinking skills/doesn't like to think too much/rather think emotionally even if it's irrational will jump on board because "Hey, I care about children!".

Knowing this... those that are fighting against this sad excuse for public service where they stand on the graves of children like soap boxes... using every memorial service for this tragic event as an excuse to bring up their misguided political agenda (aka road to hell paved with good intentions)... they know that they have to counter it with publicity for information that counters the ignorance being spread.

If you're upset with what day they chose for getting attention to a very valid argument... then you should be just as upset every time a politician adds their politics to the few solemn words they have to share when bringing up Sandyhook or any other tragedy.

How about you be fair and write about how disgusted you are with that?

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

" It’s one thing if you’re a responsible gun owner and keep your views to yourself. "

So it's okay for you to not keep your mere opinion to yourself because you get paid for it... but it's not okay for someone to write on their own facebook wall without you blocking/removing/hiding them all together because you don't like seeing or reading it?

Are you really willing to write people off in your life because of how they view and/or enjoy firearms? How sad...

Maybe your brother simply wants you to understand something you choose to refuse understanding. Maybe he's hoping you're more open-minded than you're proving otherwise. Maybe he thinks you'd be a better person for it and that an actual sense of open-mindedness would do you good... and all because he cares about you and doesn't want to see you fall on the wrong side of history... only to make things worse with your ill begotten bias.

I understand the the premise "if you don't want to read it, don't" in relation to reading what you write on ctboom... but I find the spreading of ignorance both dangerous and bad for society. Maybe we should impede your 1st amendment rights and ban that along with the things you don't like. Would only be fair.

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

Anna, you do realize that back when samurai swords were the best weapon to use... people loved practicing against mannequins and each other with them... right?

Oh wait... people still do.

::facepalm::

oldcorporal
oldcorporal

Dear Miss Zap,

I'm sorry that my views concerning the 2nd Amendment are "wrong," as far as you are concerned. It makes me sad. You see, the fact is that our republic is based on the concept of the people have the ultimate power over the government. That the power of government comes from the people. That means that the government must trust the people.

But the government is, increasingly, striving to disarm the people. I don't want to sound like a crazy man, but that is the first step towards establishing a non-republican (little "r" republican - I have no problem with other parties. Not even the all night party.) government.

This would be a disaster like no other for this country.

Do you really want something like that? Where only the opinions of the anointed are considered worthy? Would they allow you your opinion? Can you say, "The pen is mightier than the sword." with a straight face? If so, then can your pen can reach further than a sword in the hands of an evil mind.

2000 thousand+ years ago, when Julius Caeser was conquering transalpine Gaul, he exterminated a Gaulish tribe that was particularly troublesome. And all his men had were those swords that you'd like to go back to.

You must understand that, if faced by a group of thugs, a ninety-year old granny can defeat them if she has a gun and the courage to stand. They may also have guns - probably they do - but do they have that kind of courage. That poor, frail woman has nothing left to lose and they do.

She shouldn't be forced to lose her life just to please you.

RhondaMH
RhondaMH

I agree with all the people that responded. There is nothing wrong w/liking to shoot for fun. My nephews learn how to use a bow & arrow in Scouts. That could kill someone too, but they shoot at targets just like people that shoot guns. I don't own a gun myself, but if anything ever happened to me like it did writer "Danielle", you can bet your ass I'd be packing. And it is true what others wrote. It's not normal people that are using these to hurt others. And when all the criminals can illegally get their hands on assult weapons, what are the general public to do when confronted w/a maniac? Throw a book at their heads & hope for the best? Hate guns all you want, but don't bitch about the advocates. (And I think going to a shooting range on a date would be fun!)

Pete
Pete

Gun Bigot

A person who hates guns. Typically has little or no personal knowledge of guns, may never have even fired one, certainly doesn't have any. Would gladly subject innocent people to defenselessness. An elitist. One with an irrational and morbid fear of guns that is ignorant and immoral. Spews bile and venom at guns, gun owners, gun-rights advocates, gun-rights associations, pro-Bill of Rights legislators. Striking similarity and direct parallels with the racial bigotry of the civil rights efforts since the 1960s.

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

Just because you don't think something, doesn't make it untrue. The evidence is against you, not with you. Your bias keeps you from acknowledging that.

Danielle
Danielle

It's amazing to you, is it? Consider getting out more often.

Gun ownership doesn't negate empathy. We own guns because we value life.

I can't have empathy for anyone if I'm dead because someone ambushed me at a stop-sign, can I?

GailMishlerCorbett
GailMishlerCorbett

Thank you.


Amazing to me that the pro gun people that responded, immediately went to rage level calling you names and insulting you for having an opinion.  No guns don't kill people...people kill people...with guns, and without guns they'd have to get close enough for you to have a chance to fight back or run.  Doing ANYTHING OTHER than remembering those beautiful angels on the anniversary of their MURDER is evil.  Be HUMAN.  Have Empathy.  Save your insults and profanity.  Put yourself in the shoes of one of those mothers, fathers, sisters', brothers, who lost their Kindergartener that day.  I will not check back on this page, so save your breath telling me how I am not entitled to have an opinion...but you're entitled to you guns.

Danielle
Danielle

No serious defender of the Second Amendment is screaming about "how cool AK-47’s are," you ignorant blowhard. We're not talking about massacring people. We're talking about personal protection--or, more specifically, about our right as citizens of a free country to defend, literally, our lives against those who would do us harm. In keeping with this goal, most of us law-abiding citizens (read: the only people affected by gun laws) carry handguns, not AK-47's. I can't believe I had to spell that out for you.

Oh--you hate guns? You don't think guns will curb violence? You would rather rely on the police for protection? Ah, the police. They are, after all, so much more responsible than average citizens. Except that they aren't, and that learning how to safely and effectively operate a weapon is no more difficult for the average citizen than for the average cop.

Your hatred of guns and willingness rely on other people for protection is all well and good until, like me, you get ambushed at a stop-sign by six large, strange men, who try to drag you out of your vehicle, and tell you that you are "a cunt who deserves what's coming to you--ha, ha, ha---look at the little cunt!"

It's a bad world out there--one that necessitates the ability to defend yourself. I sincerely hope you don't find that out that hard way.

Danielle
Danielle

No serious defender of the Second Amendment is screaming about "how cool AK-47’s are," you ignorant blowhard. We're not talking about massacring people. We're talking about personal protection--or, more specifically, about our right as citizens of a free country to defend, literally, our lives against those who would do us harm. In keeping with this goal, most of us law-abiding citizens (read: the only people affected by gun laws) carry handguns, not AK-47's. I can't believe I had to spell that out for you.

Oh--you hate guns? You don't think guns will curb violence? You would rather rely on the police for protection? Ah, the police. They are, after all, so much more responsible than average citizens. Except that they aren't, and that learning how to safely and effectively operate a weapon is no more difficult for the average citizen than for the average cop.

Your hatred of guns and willingness rely on other people for protection is all well and good until, like me, you get ambushed at a stop-sign by six large, strange men, who try to drag you out of your vehicle, and tell you that you are "a cunt who deserves what's coming to you--ha, ha, ha---look at the little cunt!"

It's a bad world out there--one that necessitates the ability to defend yourself. I sincerely hope you don't find that out that hard way.


Charles
Charles

This article was garbage. "It’s one thing if you’re a responsible gun owner and keep your views to yourself.  It’s another to brag about the fact that you and your significant other are having a date night firing guns." Later on she says she's a fan of free speech. Huge contradiction. Do you expect gays and lesbians to just keep their views to themselves? Do you hide people on facebook that advocate for gay rights? How about immigration? Abortion? Probably not, she just has it out for gun owners because they like to "show off" on facebook. Oh wait, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT EVERYONE ON FACEBOOK DOES. She just doesn't like when people that believe in the concept of gun ownership "brag" or show off. So everyone is okay in her book, except for these group of people she hates.

 It's laughable that she expects gun owners to "keep views to yourself" when they are assaulting our right to own certain firearms. I could post a million facts and numbers from the FBI here that would prove crime is on the decline and murders overall are WAY down since the early 1990s. Her refusal to acknowledge fact is ludicrous. If I showed you evidence of the earth being round, but you still want to believe that the world was flat, you would look totally ridiculous. I have to study for a midterm, but since the author insists on hating something, here you go: a survey of 15,000 police officers on how banning "assault weapons" and "high capacity magazines" would affect crime and society:


http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf

 I have more links to FBI reports, but because of the government shutdown, they are unavailable :(



Real_American7
Real_American7

This article is comical...you do know that firearms are used for sport right? Not just as a deadly weapon which is how you seem to depict them...It takes an incredible amount of skill, practice, and range time to be good at shooting targets, PIECES OF PAPER, for sport. Go get your mannequin and make a Facebook post because you would truly look like a Psycho. When I go to the range to practice for competitions that makes me a lunatic? You have some twisted views miss, you should maybe educate yourself before posting garbage like this. 

I will agree however that the date of this rally is a bit undesirable because of the circumstances, but you have to look at it from the other side, which you fail to do. What if there was an armed guard in the school, what if the principle had a firearm in her desk...that could have SAVED lives...That's what that rally is about! Yet you "HATE" guns so why bother looking into that part, because they don't affect you in any way and you clearly know nothing about them...makes sense.This is what people like you fail to understand...guns are not bad, it's the people that use them....Why focus on the tool when it's obviously this nations mental health systems that continues to fail us again and again...Sandy Hook, DC, Colorado, all INSANE people that our nation lets walk the streets...but blame us responsible firearm owners...yeah its all our fault....

Anniecap
Anniecap

Good for you Anna! I live next town over from Newtown and on my way home from work i drove past the funerals everyday for what seemed like forever. Hundreds of stunned people, not talking, just waiting their turn, for sometimes hours to pay their repects. When you read what Veronica Ponzer wrote, describing her son's body....well you can't read it and not be changed forever. Waiting for hours for word of your child on a fridged night only to be told that search and recovery is over and that it is now a crime scene. Put yourself in those peoples shoes. When evil enters your child/grandchilds school will you still say that you are glad you protected the mentally unstable shooters rights? I just want people applying checked out. I don't want to take your guns away. Almost all these mass shooters had a history that might have preveted some of this.

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

@RhondaMH [EDIT]

"
Bias, such as the admitted article writer's, has absolutely no place in a constructive argument, and therefore shouldn't be part of the ignorance spreading wannabe attempt at news/blog/opinion media that only acts a disservice to anyone actually wanting things to get better. The only people that want to hear someone's whiny mere OPINION are those that already agree with them. People with the same bias putting loyalty to each other over integrity because it's easier and more comfortable that way.

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

@RhondaMH I'm taking my new girlfriend out shooting sometime soon. She's never fired a gun and doesn't assume to understand everything about them in regards to their place and effects (both negative and positive) on society. She trusts me with them because she knows who I am, my character, and how safe and careful I am with them because of proper training (ex-military law enforcement). The same safety training non-military/law enforcement show millions of times a day with their own firearms.

There are no absolutes and that's why this is so controversial. Just like a police officer or military member... a good guy with a gun doesn't always mean they can defend themselves. Without a firearm though, they, just like any person being assaulted with a weapon of ANY kind, will almost always lose a confrontation if not armed with a equal or greater "force multiplier". This is about increasing the ability to defend oneself and their loved ones in order to increase the chance of survival, our most inherent right in life, bottom line.

Statistics of showing an increased number of accidental shootings in homes that have firearms is a case of safety training and not securing weapons... the same as not teaching a kid not to play with knives/matches/bleach and keeping them out of reach. Getting rid of guns doesn't stop the fact that the person isn't safe with their kids or themselves. Kids are hurt more often from non-firearm objects in the home every year than from firearms. This shows that the firearm isn't the problem.

Looking at higher success rates of suicide attempts with firearms is an irrelevant point as well seeing as a person who wants to guarantee a successful suicide will go out of their way to make sure they succeed, firearm or otherwise. Most that attempt to commit suicide really want to live and this is why their attempts end up as sloppy cries for much needed help as a final test to see if someone will be there to save them... a test of what they perceive as "fate".

The problem is that we are so divided by our bias and fears when beyond that... we all share the same goals of safety for ourselves, our loved ones, and the innocent defenseless. It's our means to those ends that are different and why we end up getting nowhere. People like this author are completely incapable of admitting that they may be wrong on the subject because the bias and security she feels in the position she holds that she believes makes up part of who she is is so strong that it renders her willfully ignorant on the subject... as people do all the time on any number of topics and positions. We all like to think we're "open-minded", but many can't name a single strong position they hold that they may be wrong about.

I can admit... I might be wrong about these things... but it will take conclusive evidence to let me know that. People confuse supporting evidence for conclusive and tell themselves they've made a strong enough argument when they haven't even come close.

I cover these things, the psychology, the statistics regarding violence in the world and the effectiveness of law enforcement compared to an armed civilian, the true effects of violence in our tv/movies/video games and why they happen, and the large number of fallacies used by many in congress including both of CT's senators, Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal... in my book "Where We Stand: The Gun Control Debate - A Constructive Argument".

All proceeds are going to the Save the Children Fund.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Gun-Control-Debate-Constructive-ebook/dp/B00BKIAZ92

Bias, such as the article writers'author's, has absolutely no place in a constructive argument.


Sincerely, 
An almost life-long Democrat (until he lost faith in both major parties) who used to be afraid of guns until he was willing to open his eyes and learn something new even if it was uncomfortable at first.

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

@GailMishlerCorbett Also, remove the namecalling from any of these posts... and their points/arguments are still 100% valid. Regardless of their character... they're still right. How you decide to judge someone else doesn't give you the right to stay willfully ignorant on a subject you're already biased about.

xRegardsx
xRegardsx

 Until you come up with a way to remove EVERY gun from EVERY persons hands AT THE SAME TIME... you have no right to suggest people shouldn't be equally armed as someone who would assault them with a firearm in order to defend themselves.

You also have no understanding of the reasons firearms are necessary in a country that may become full on tyrannical.