Christina Greene, RIP
Bookworm on Jan 09 2011 at 11:35 am | Filed under: Uncategorized
One of those who died was nine year old Christina Greene. I am not superstitious (far from it), but I find it somehow especially tragic that she was born on September 11, 2001.
Related posts:
- In memoriam *UPDATED*
- Giving their lives for our freedom
- Never forget — September 11, 2001 (Kept at top; scroll down for newer posts) *UPDATED 9/8/11*
Email This Post To A Friend
9 Responses to “Christina Greene, RIP”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yes, Book, it was hearing the news of this young, oh so young, girl that I decided that I didn’t have the heart to listen to or read any more news about his tragic event.
In the words of that song “Rocking in the Free World:”
“There’s one more kid that will never go to school, never get to fall in love, never get to be cool . . .”
I think it’s a Neil Young song that is meant to be an anti George H.W. Bush song as it has lyrics about a 1,000 points of light. I hear it played at my gym all the time. But the above lyrics seem so fitting for this young-girl’s cut-short life.
This is truly very tragic – the anguish her parents must be feeling now (that is if they aren’t just plain numb) is beyond what most of can possibly begin to understand. Her neighbor who took her to this event must also be dealing with heavy emotions.
The neighbor, was shot 4 times and I believe recovering from her wounds.
The murders, have another awful side chilling effect. Will parents, friends, neighbors second guess taking their children to political gatherings and events.
One must be armed if one wishes to take risks with one’s children. Otherwise you are simply hoping not to be slaughtered, without any actual power to dictate the outcome.
I see where a congresswoman from NY is already beating the drums for a gun control measure, supposedly to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally disturbed. This an impossible thing to do if one is determined, insane or not, to get a gun to kill people. If there had been armed people in the crowd they might have been able to stop this guy. The counter to this gun control congresswoman should be that we have the right to self defense. You can argue hypotheticals all day long but nothing would have stopped this guy but a bullet. It is outrageous this blatant political posturing before the bodies have even been autopsied. This congresswoman was said to be elected because her husband and son were victims of gun violence. I wonder if her rage extends to the perpetrators of 9-11?
stanley #4 days,
> I see where a congresswoman from NY is already beating the drums for a gun control measure. [...] The counter to this gun control congresswoman should be that we have the right to self defense. [...] This congresswoman was said to be elected because her husband and son were victims of gun violence. I wonder if her rage extends to the perpetrators of 9-11?
Your logic is consistent! We must ban all airplane flights at once! Because terrorists can take control of planes in the air, and use them to kill. There’s no difference between that (using a plane in flight as a tool for murder), and using a gun as a tool for murder, except scale.
Although, I think back to DQ’s – Don Quixote’s – debate points and I wonder what he would think. He carves out the exception for guns – finds them uniquely worthy of consideration for banning – and probably would not appreciate the analogy in use here. (Though he has stated that he thinks the threat to liberty of independent individuals probably overrides the moral exception he wants to make for wishing to ban guns in the hands all free individual citizens, be they criminal or law-abiding.)
If a criminal gets out of jail, immediately gets a gun, and commits a crime then the Democrat will blame the easy availability of guns – the Republican will blame the criminal who was released back into society too soon.
>>If there had been armed people in the crowd they might have been able to stop this guy.>>
Maybe, maybe not. There were initial reports of someone shooting back at him – I wonder what happened to that.
Still, always remember – when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
(In defense of local law enforcement officials, apparently no one had notified them that there was going to be any kind of a political event, and that was the common practice. Non-notification, that is.)
Maybe, maybe not. There were initial reports of someone shooting back at him – I wonder what happened to that.
It’s a matter of saturation.
If 1 person out of 20 has a gun, it is 1% effective. If 10 people out of 20 have a gun. it is 50% effective. If 15/20 have a gun, it is 95% effective. It’s how it goes. Because one person, out of a crowd of 20, does not have the angle and opportunity to shoot accurately. 10/20 provides people the time and opportunity to fire. After all, the attacker has the initiative and he can use surprise and chaos to take out 5 or 10 people out of the 20 before they can correctly react, thus negating the advantage of 10 armed individuals in a crowd of 20. But if the number was 15/20, it would become neigh impossible to negate the counter-attack with simply surprise by one assailant.
One person in a crowd getting attacked, is just one person. He has no line of fire to the attacker. He has to get through the civilian shields in front of him. 20/20 with weapons training and available weapons in reach, is a different matter than 1/20 or 2/20 or 5/20 or 10/20.
Concealed carry users are not as prevalent as people think. The percentage doesn’t even approach 40% in border states such as Arizona.