Why Are We Shocked When Assault Weapons Are Used To Kill People?

‘At least 27 shot to death, many of them children.’

Americans were jolted out of their holiday cheer Friday with the news that an elementary school in Connecticut was the latest scene of mass murder. Early reports suggest that over 100 rounds were fired, and 2 semi automatic assault weapons (a Glock and a Sig Sauer) were recovered from the scene.

The shooter was not intending to hunt animals with those guns, folks.

Assault weapons were designed to kill Billy and Susie, not Bambi and Thumper. So why are we always shocked when they are used to do just that?

The zealots at the National Rifle Association will soon launch into their defense of these semi automatic weapons: ‘Guns don’t kill people, people do’ and insist ‘It’s our constitutional right.”

Malarky.

The 2nd amendment argument employed by these Rambo wannabes is a perversion of our Constitution. Think about it. Loading and firing a gun was a fairly lengthy process in the 1700s. Could our Founding Fathers have even imagined magazines and guns capable of killing many with a simple press of the trigger? Did they really intend for every citizen to possess such a weapon?

Doubtful.

We love our guns in northern Minnesota, to be sure. Hunting wild game is a part of our culture, and for some, necessary to put food on the table. But no one, repeat no one, needs a semi-automatic gun to shoot a duck, a deer or a rabbit. Assault weapons were designed for one purpose and one purpose only – to kill people. That people sometimes choose to use semi-automatic assault weapons for their designated purpose should come as no surprise.

We need to either accept today’s horrific scene of many adults and children dead as collateral damage for permissive gun control laws or stop allowing every Tom, Dick and Mary from owning or possessing weapons capable of mass execution.

MN-08: Radical Rick Nolan Goes To Harvard

Former US Rep Rick Nolan promised northern Minnesota voters he would hit the ground running if returned to Congress. As 8th District Congressman-elect, Nolan is living up to that promise by participating in a series of events designed to ensure the Cuyuna Range native arrives well-prepared when the 113th Congress convenes in January. According to a press release, this week Nolan’s grueling pre-swearing in schedule includes the 20th Bipartisan Program for Newly Elected Members of Congress at Harvard University:

Minnesota’s 8th District Congressman-elect Rick Nolan has joined more than fifty other new U.S. Representatives at Harvard University’s Institute of Politics (IOP) for a bipartisan conference examining a variety of complex issues they will face when the 113th Congress convenes in January.

Labeled as ‘Radical Rick’ by moderates like Norm Coleman and Sheldon Adelson for his unqualified support of the middle class and organized labor, and for his insistence that health care and education be accessible for all, Nolan shared more of his radical ideas for the 113th Congress:

The campaigns are over, and now Democrats and Republicans alike need to get about the business of solving problems and governing this nation progressively and responsibly

We are spending this time discussing and debating issues directly affecting jobs, the economy and the middle class as part of a Harvard program that has for decades helped prepare new Members of Congress to be more effective.

The Program runs from Dec. 11 through Dec. 14, and is intended to complement the House new members orientation. Topics covered in seminars and workshops led by prominent public policy scholars and practitioners include the economy, the federal budget, foreign policy, education, ethics and effectively navigating the legislative process.