Question of the Day: Should Newtown Parents Be Left Alone?

By Pascal

From news.yahoo.com:

“After a year of personal suffering and political frustration, (Nicole) Hockley and other Newtown parents are fighting to stay optimistic as their effort builds a national operation backed by an alliance of well-funded organizations working to pressure Congress ahead of next fall’s elections. The groups are sending dozens of paid staff into key states, enlisting thousands of volunteer activists and preparing to spend tens of millions of dollars against politicians who stand in the way of their goals. It may well take time, they say, to counter the influence of the NRA on Capitol Hill . . .

“‘I know it’s not a matter of if it happens. It’s a matter of when. This absolutely keeps me going,’ says Hockley, who joined a handful of Newtown parents in a private White House meeting with Vice President Joe Biden this week. ‘No matter how much tragedy affects you, you have to find a way forward. You have to invest in life.’”

It’s nice that they can have all these private meetings with high government officials. They asked to be left alone, and the media lap dogs have mostly complied. But they will not leave gun owners alone, so why should we leave them alone?

comments

  1. avatar Marcus Aurelius says:

    If they don’t use their tragedy to push a political agenda, then yes. But if they use the deaths of their own children to push an agenda then it’s fair game in my opinion.

    1. avatar Mike says:

      Agree completely. Looks like they are fair game considering the level of engagement with the federal government and their objectives.

    2. avatar mirgc says:

      I feel sorry for them. And not for the children that were stolen from them. Most of them were easily manipulated by the gun-control lobby to support a political cause that would not have made an impact in their situations (or others).

    3. avatar John Fritz says:

      They practically have a scheduled time slot with Scot Pelley. As others have pointed out, can’t have it both ways.

      I find it disturbing to see Bill Sherlach, Nicole Hockley and Nelba Marquez-Greene be repeat guests on the CBS Evening News for the purpose of tearfully asking and answering rhetorical questions about their perceived lack of gun control.

      1. avatar Rich Grise says:

        Something about the lamestream media serving as Our Glorious Beloved Infallible Commissar’s propaganda arm made me think of the parable of the old woman and the snake: http://recoilmag.com/?page_id=45

        There will be a time of great schadenfreude!

    4. avatar William Burke says:

      ABSOLUTELY. No more speaking with forked tongue.

  2. avatar NYC2AZ says:

    If they want to be left alone, that request should be honored. If they want to be political, let them be political. Just don’t tell me I can’t attack their position if they choose the latter.

    1. avatar Colt Magnum says:

      Agreed.

  3. avatar Cliff H says:

    I’ll leave them alone the instant they leave me alone. As Limbaugh says, you have to understand the league you’ve agreed to play in. You step into the national political limelight, you are fair game no matter who’s blood is on the shirt you’re waving.

    1. avatar IdahoPete says:

      Yep. If they are going to dance in the blood of the victims to advance a political agenda, they should not expect to be treated with kid gloves.

  4. No, they should not be left alone. Shame on the parents for turning children’s deaths into a political movement to restrict the right to bear arms.

    1. avatar A-Rod says:

      So says the man with his own political agenda and felony conviction.

      1. avatar CarlosT says:

        That said, he’s not wrong.

        1. avatar Jus Bill says:

          Agreed.

      2. Please cite the felony conviction documents. You’ve brought this up before with no proof. I’d hate to sue you for libel.

        1. avatar peirsonb says:

          Leonard, I have to admit that I don’t always agree with your viewpoints. But, honestly, from what I’ve read about the deal in Nashville I have to say I agree with you…..

          From one article: “Due to his inability to prove that his weapon was legal and having a firearm silencer attached, Embody was taken into custody.” – Innocent until PROVEN guilty…the burden is on them.

          From another: “Contrary to his protestations, the police did have reasonable suspicion to stop him. Tennessee law Section 39-17-1302 prohibits ownership of unregistered NFA” – Again, THEY have to prove it’s unregistered. Just plain having one isn’t reasonable suspicion….

          My support notwithstanding, I reserve the right to disagree with you in the future…

        2. avatar A-Rod says:

          You said you have a recent felony conviction. You say on you websit tou have shut diwn sales. Care to clarify? You can hardly sue for libel for comments on a Internet forum.

  5. avatar H.R. says:

    “I know it’s not a matter of if it happens. It’s a matter of when.”

    Yes, sadly it is. And if double barrel shotguns were the only firearms in existence in the US, it would still happen again. It has happened in China and the attackers there use kitchen knives.

    I think it’s right to respect grieving parents, but emotion isn’t a good way to start legislation. Victims of crimes don’t get to erase the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments even when those rights benefit criminals.

    They can feel whatever they feel, but when it turns to political action, we have to oppose that.

    1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

      Not just Kitchen knives. It was not even a blip on the news but a guy in China killed 46 people with a gas can on a bus.

      http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-06-09/china/39849276_1_34-passengers-bus-moments-xinhua

  6. avatar Gregory Athanas says:

    If they enter into politics, game on. If they remain quiet, leave them alone.

  7. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    If they are in the forefront, waving a bloody shirt, then they are fair game.
    If they want to respect my freedom, I’ll honor their grief and let them be.

  8. avatar Mina says:

    Left alone? I would say ignored.

    If we were an organization of people dedicated to the “Fixing of Mentally Deranged People” then yes we should be commisserating today.

    However just because we enjoy our lives with guns and these kids were killed “by gun” – this fact provides us with zero connection to these people.

    Those children were killed by a mentally deranged person. That is tragic. However we are not responsible or accountable, unless you want to count our collective lack of attention to the over-medication of young boys, or the lack of good quality mental health care in our country, or our systematic minimalization of men in our society as a whole.

    The more we start to realize that, the further along we’ll be at putting the gun control debate to bed.

    1. avatar Mina says:

      however I agree generally with everyone else, if they are using the day to re-active their fight for gun control then they should be fair game.

      how about some statements like “… we have proven in the past year that schools and our children are sitting targets. damn straight we need to do something about it! trying to eliminate the wolves is a lot less effective than arming the sheep – so let’s arm the sheep. if you really want to protect children let’s protect them!”

      FROM AC:
      “…Men with guns invading our schools and shooting our children is not something you are going to solve with a weak-kneed, pacifist policy, designed to make everyone in the school into helpless sheep – even if making everyone as helpless and impotent as the average Liberal is a fundamental Liberal policy desire. Americans have a long tradition, dating back to the minutemen, of normal citizens who are bravely willing to fight evil at a moment’s notice, to protect the innocent. Our teachers are no different from those great men. Victoria Soto stood her ground, and looked into the eyes of a man with a gun, and ultimately threw herself between the gunman and her students. Had Liberals allowed her to be armed, she could have fought him off, and prevented the massacre. She could have won, had Liberals not forced her to be unarmed and helpless. Instead,, after all of these massacres, Liberals passed a law forcing every teacher to be disarmed, and unable to defend their children. Victoria Soto was helpless precisely because of pacifist Liberal involvement in resolving this violent issue.

      Armed madmen killing children is a wolf problem, and it requires a wolf solution, not the ineffectual, pacifist sheep solutions offered by Liberals, such as gun-free school laws designed to dissuade mass murderers intending to kill themselves after their massacres are over. Liberal solutions have done nothing but make the decent people more vulnerable to the madmen, and that is wrong, on a moral level. There is only one way to stop an armed madman, bent on mass murder at a school. It is to allow teachers to be armed and trained, and deal with him on the spot.

      Train the teachers to shoot, and allow them to be armed, or the next massacre will be entirely the fault of the pansy Liberals in this country, who know nothing of how to survive in the real world, where massacre-producing madmen ignore the very fantasy laws the Liberal thinks will control them. Unless Liberals want our school personnel to be unable to defend themselves, more children to die, and the next massacre to be clearly their fault, they need to support the arming of teachers.”

      http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/a-tale-of-two-gun-control-debates-and-rush-limbaughs-low-information-voter/

      1. avatar Pascal says:

        All it takes is a quick search, while on one hand they told the MSM to be left alone, on the other hand the are going out to the same MSM over the next few day to go full gun control mode – they cannot have both ways but they sure are trying.

  9. avatar 505markf says:

    If they wish to be left alone in their grief and remembrance, I would respect that. If they use their grief as the emotional appeal to destroy one of the foundational principles of this nation, then no. I can imagine that they have asked themselves thousands of times over the past year, “what could we have done to prevent this?” There answer I to ban guns. That’s the end game. That is not disputable as NONE of the proposed laws would have had any affect on ANY of the recent school shootings. It is not about background checks or the size of magazines. The end game is civilian disarmament.

    The facts are that we as a society protect what we value. We protect it from evil by force of arms. We do this for elected officials and police officers. We do it for banks, casinos, sporting venues and strip clubs. We do not routinely do this for our children. How sick is that?

    To ignore reality, which in this case will absolutely result in additional people suffering the same grief, that is reprehensible.

  10. avatar Mina says:

    On the anniversary of the Sandy Hook shooting: I’d like to refer your attention to the Anonymous Conservative’s analysis of our response to the shooting one year ago:

    http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/a-tale-of-two-gun-control-debates-and-rush-limbaughs-low-information-voter/

  11. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    She’s cute. Single? Her and Shannon. . . . Hmmm

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Living on the edge, Dirk. Right on the edge.

      1. avatar tfunk says:

        I like where his edge is at

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Mine doesn’t have an edge on it. I imagine 1 with an edge would be painfull to your partner.

      2. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

        ROB – you aren’t gonna start quoting Top Gun and wanting to high five me while we play beach soccer are you?

        1. avatar peirsonb says:

          ……no…..no…..

        2. avatar Stinkeye says:

          Volleyball, not soccer. Get your slow-motion homoerotic movie scenes straight, man.

    2. avatar Jeff says:

      you sure do have a thing for barely attractive female executive types.

      wanna bet that the mom in the photo has some generic MBA and is on the board of some uneventful northeast corporate conglomerate?

  12. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    If they were using critical thinking to understand what happened to their family was a “Black Swan” event, then they would not be on a mass civilian disarmament tour. They are trying to solve the problem with laws and regulations that would have done nothing to prevent the original event. Nothing they propose will save a single life. We know that here, but they are too blinded by emotions to make a reasoned decision on the matter.

  13. avatar Nick says:

    Leave ME alone. I didn’t kill your kid and I don’t know anyone who killed your kid. I’m F’ing tired of jerks like this. She thinks because she suffered a loss she has the perfect right to punish people who had nothing to do with it.

    Damn liberal control freak.

  14. avatar Notguiltfree says:

    My wife’s uncle was a part time plumber that was killed in an auto accident with a truck years ago but we never thought it was the trucks fault or the fact that he was plumbing at the time. Only a narrow minded liberal would try and justify outlawing trucks and plumbers as the reason for his death. Of course knowing how Obama probably feels about “Joe the Plumber” maybe there’s hope we can get in to see the Prez and then start a commission and get our names in the paper so we can get our 15 minutes of fame and oppress as many people as possible……..

  15. avatar smitty says:

    From mother to professional victim in a years time.
    No I say screw her, she needs to STFU!

    smitty

  16. avatar Paul says:

    If they want to fight for what they believe in then they should expect others who disagree to also fight. So I say their actions have already answered the question.

  17. avatar Rich Grise says:

    Someone should ask them why they’re so eager to guarantee a repeat performance by rendering defenseless those who could actually protect their children.

  18. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    If these folks keep their relationships to the victims out of the equation and want to form a group.
    I’m ok with that.
    If as parents of a victim they wave the bloody t-shirt and get media attention because of it.
    They and their lives both private and public, become fair game in my book.

  19. avatar peirsonb says:

    Can I vote for leaving them alone AFTER we receive a full refund for flying them back and forth to DC?

  20. avatar Jus Bill says:

    “The groups are sending dozens of paid staff into key states…”

    This then would make these “poor grieving moms and dads”:
    Paid political operatives/employees
    Professional cynics and liars
    Self-serving ghouls and jackals

    I could go on, but I am fundamentally pissed about these peoples’ actions. They disrespect and debase the memories of their children for personal gain. They deserve to be attacked in response.

  21. avatar Cknarf says:

    Those trying to disarm the people should not be ignored.

  22. avatar Ralph says:

    Their kids are dead and they want everyone else’s kids to die too, as a monument to theirs. Leave them alone? Fvck no.

    1. avatar Kirk says:

      See my note below. Most — the vast majority — are not pursuing “gun grabbing” concepts.

  23. avatar Kirk says:

    Having met quite a few of these parents, including Nicole Hockley, I can attest that they are not uniform in how they are pursuing their objectives. I can also attest that OFA, MAIG, and other extreme groups have diligently co-opted the Sandy Hook Promise effort, which most parents actually did not want to become political.

    Many of them are very intelligent people, not knee-jerk gun grabbers, who fully understand that “banning firearms” is a ridiculous objective. But it is hard for their voices to rise to the surface against the MSM.

    I am very sorry to report that lots and lots of money is swirling around the Sandy Hook families, all of it liberal money.

    But I urge everyone to not necessarily blame the parents.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      “But I urge everyone to not necessarily blame the parents.”

      For taking the liberal money that’s swirling around them? For accepting the invitations for all expense paid trips to DC on Air Force One? For becoming the face of MDA or MAIG, even if it’s for a day?

      I sympathize and respect the privacy of those parents who are grieving privately, and urge all to leave them alone to heal. As for the rest, what I said about them above…

    2. avatar Pascal says:

      If the parents who are not for gun control don’t speak up, they will be lumped into the same group. Does Hockley speak for all the parents? If the answer is no, then the other side of the argument better damn well speak up. If they are taking money to shut up, then they are just as bad.

      I don’t give a darn what money is being thrown at them, ask them if they have want to be political pawns or if they have any personal integrity.

      What you have written just proves my point, they want to be left alone but have no problem bothering you by taking your rights away.

  24. avatar S_J says:

    These parents lost their kids to a deranged loser (or “deeply troubled young man,” whatever makes you feel better), all dying in a way more horrible than most parents can imagine. True enough. I felt much sympathy for them on that level. Note the past tense.

    The moment that many of these same parents figuratively stripped the shirts from their dead children’s backs and waved them over their heads in front of the media vultures and political tapeworms, making a selfish and irrational sideshow out of their grief, I immediately disavowed any sympathy whatsoever. They are fair game, and no more children or adults should die over their delusions. No more “gun free zones,” no more pointless bans, no more “common sense reforms.” I will spit in your face if you whore out dead kids for your agenda.

  25. avatar Paleo says:

    Yes, unless they stray into Civilian – disarmament politics. If they do, go after them like a rabid pit bull.

  26. avatar MattG says:

    It pisses me off that Hockley and a few other families pretend to represent everyone affected by the tragedy that day. The majority of the families have grieved privately, not allowing themselves to be taken advantage of by these slimy anti-gun groups that had the same agenda way before any of this. A couple of victim’s fathers have come out in favor of gun rights. This woman and her handful of cohorts tried everything to get the state of Connecticut to seize all “high capacity” magazines and “assault weapons” from their owners, but merely had to settle for existing ones being “registered”.
    http://www.ctmirror.org/story/2013/04/01/newtown-families-want-strict-ban-large-ammo-magazines
    They are after our rights big time, and they don’t get to play the victim card whenever it is convenient for them.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      They parents who she does not represent are victims themselves yet again if they don’t speak up. They need to either speak out and separate themselves or choose to be painted with a broad brush with whatever Hockley does.

  27. avatar Nazgul says:

    In other words these people want to say whatever they want in order to help shred the Bill of Rights, but not be held responsible for their words or actions after the fact. They should not expect to be left alone if they choose to enter the public and political arenas, or lash out against others that disagree with them.

  28. avatar Ing says:

    Those who really want to be left alone are being left alone. We don’t see them in the news because they’re living their lives like the normal people they are.

    These people — Nicole Hockley and her “foundation” — they’ve traded their personal tragedy for national recognition and political privilege.

    If they want to be left alone, they’re in the wrong damn business.

  29. avatar Steve says:

    The ones that have minded their own business this whole time? You betcha.

    The ones who go at the forefront of stripping others of their Constitutionally protected rights? Nope, that’s what they brought on themselves.

    I feel horrible for their loss, but they chose to get active in the political realm, and part of that choice is being in the spotlight. Even if they don’t want to.

  30. avatar Terry Weeks says:

    These poor people have had their unimaginable grief ABused by self serving politicians for their own ends. The real issue here is about mental health care not gun control. We Need to address the problem not the tool used. if this kid had used Molotov Cocktails would we be banning gasoline??? On the other hand, if just 1 of the teachers , principals,councellors or secretary’s had been armed and trained in defensive arms use, how many young lives could have been saved? It’s long past time to use our HEADS to protect ourselves and our family’s. It’s disgusting that such a tragedy be used to advance political standing and not address the real problem here. SHAME ON YOU all you politicians using this tragedy as merely a stepping stone in your self serving political careers!

  31. avatar Terry Weeks says:

    Sorry I was so windy there

  32. avatar Jeff says:

    Choice quote from the article:

    “The head of Bloomberg’s organization says that the billionaire New York mayor is installing paid staff in more than a dozen states expected to take up gun control legislation next year to complement a robust Washington lobbying operation and television ads.

    “In 2012, the mayor spent about $10 million or so dipping his toe in the water. I guess we’ll find out what the whole foot looks like in 2014,” said Mark Glaze, Mayors Against Illegal Guns’ executive director.”

    Wow. So Bloomberg is “installing paid staff” – and no real further digging or insight into this in the article, either. I guess it’s just completely OK for political billionaires to “install paid staff” in elected political positions?

  33. avatar Aharon says:

    When you pick up one end of a stick the other end rises too. They have chosen to pick up the stick and are now subject to the results of their action. Once any people, even those who have experienced personal loss, enter the political realm of gun rights then they have chosen to do-away with the social and moral courtesy they would have received if they had chosen not to call for limiting the freedom and rights of others who have not yet been victimized.

  34. avatar Joey S says:

    I suppose this is going to ruffle feathers, but unfortunately I look at it this way: the antis sieze every opportunity to be annoying and condescending with waiving bloody shirts in the wake of what happened. They demand oceans of legislation and only end up with lakes. Well lakes add up. I have no problem telling them that they’ve kicked the badger with capitalizing on the deaths of their children in regards to pushing political agendas. While the circumstances and of loss of life suck, I refuse to place their feelings and emotions above my rights and self preservation. I’ve spent too many years of my life supporting and defending the constitution, and I’ve lost too many buddies who have done the same just to have them stripped away so people can feel better. $0.02 take or or leave it.

  35. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    You mind your own busniess and I’ll mind mine, but don’t use your tragedy as a sword to act gun owners then use it as shield when gun owners strike back.

  36. avatar Pat says:

    If they leave me and my guns alone, I will leave them alone.

  37. Thank you for any other informative web site. The place else could I
    get that type of information written in such an ideal approach?
    I have a venture that I am simply now operating
    on, and I have been on the look out for such info.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email