Jersey Girl wrote:Starbuck wrote:
I had a friend commit suicide a few years ago. I later found out it he was the first police officer on the scene of a pretty gruesome murder. Breaks my heart.
Approximately 3,000 students were evacuated in the Florida shooting on Valentine's Day. Some of them left in ambulances, some were picked up by parents. Some got a trip to the morgue where they were likely later identified by their parents.
One can only imagine how many of those picked up by parents are suffering from trauma as I type this. School provided grief counseling is NOT treatment for trauma. How many of them are having flashbacks, hear and smell the shots, hear and smell fellow students dying on top of them while they lay on the floor of their classrooms.
One can only imagine how many of those students are going without treatment for trauma as I type this. How many of them will suffer from PTSD, anxiety and depression for years into the future.
One can only imagine how many of those students will turn to substance abuse, and how many will attempt or complete suicide.
Does that break your heart and if so, how much?
Does it break your heart enough to give up your right to own an AR?
It all breaks my heart.
And no.
"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty... and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer?
Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree." 1764, Cesare Becarri.