The poor [white] children

The inevitability of the politicization of the Newton massacre was as sure as the sun rising this morning.  What isn’t as certain is the true sincerity of those calling for more gun control in the wake of this horrible tragedy.  Why do I say this?  Murders happen all the time, so where’s the daily outrage by those on Capitol Hill or talking heads blasting the 2nd amendment about all the guns shooting and killing  people who aren’t innocent white school children?

It seems to be mostly Democrats and those who lean toward the liberal end of the spectrum who are calling for stricter regulations or all out bans on fire arms.  But it leaves me asking this: What does all this pomp on the part of liberals and Democrat politicians say about them that they are up in arms when these 20 fragile innocent little suburban white children are murdered, but for decades have been silent on the gun violence which has claimed the lives of thousands of young black men in the inner cities?  The Windy City is nearing its 500th  murder victim this year, the vast majority of whom are black yet the call to more strictly regulate guns only comes when innocent white children are killed at the end of the year.

People have been getting murdered all year long, what is it that makes the Newtown victims different from all the other murder victims tragically gunned down every year except that they’re white and young.  Are politicians and anti-gun activists only now speaking up because the victims are white?  Or is it because they were killed all at once rather than one at a time?  Either way, their outrage is a farce.

__________________________________________

This silence isn’t limited to partisan politicians either.  The usual race hustling suspects such as Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton are suspiciously silent.  You may remember the marches and demands for justice when Saint Skittles was killed by neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman.  You may also remember when the unarmed teen was killed, no one blamed the gun.  Trayvon Martin’s supporters then and now demand the shooter be held responsible for the teen’s death, not his weapon.

Comments

  1. Great point, John. The outrage is always amplified when the victims are suburban and white. I think it might have something to do with the fact that (white) politicians can see those victims and think of their own children’s safety. It is sad that it takes something like this most recent tragedy to penetrate our society and politics.

  2. In our cities and others of which I’m aware, it is generally the progressive side of the community that takes time to point out and mourn the deaths in our urban streets, as well as work for systemic change to stop the violence. I don’t think your complaint holds up to scrutiny.

    This one event is receiving much attention from everyone because it was so horrendous with so many deaths of so many young children all at once.

    To be sure, folk SHOULD be asking “WHY?!” when our minority death rates are so high. In our community, it is progressive voices that are doing so.

    Can we flip that question? Where are the conservative voices of outrage about the murder rate for minorities? (To be fair, I’m quite sure that there are some conservatives who join in the mourning here in my town, I’m just noting that – for us, at least – it’s the Democrat/liberal-leaning churches that hold/organize the services/protests/efforts for change).

    • Progressives always claim to work for change for the poor and victims but people are the poorest and most victimized in urban cities, which are nearly universally controlled by Democratic politics. If progressives are trying to do something about the plight of the poor and the victimized they aren’t doing a very good job. “Caring” isn’t getting the job done, is it.

  3. In fact, unless you can provide some evidence that liberals DON’T actively mourn, grieve and protest when children are harmed – black or white – I would suggest that this is a wildly slanderous smear used for base partisan reasons, not for reasons of truth or righteousness.

    And, unless you can provide some support that conservatives DO actively mourn, grieve and protest when non-white children are harmed, you probably have a more serious charge against more conservative folk when we look at real world evidence, IF you want to try to play the race card here.

    Or you could just back off and say, “you know what, I made an awful sounding insinuation that I can’t support and it’s unfair, my bad…” That would be the more manly, adult thing to do, ya know.

    Merry Christmas, this birthday of the Prince of Peace who taught that slanderous folk aren’t part of the Kingdom.

    • Dan

      Should I also provide proof that invisible pink unicorns don’t exist?

      This is about national outrage. There has been no national discussion gun violence until Newtown. If you have any examples of Congressmen, Senators, Governors, or the President broaching the subject please provide it.

  4. John,
    A good point. I think it has something to so with the fact that for the left to make too big of a deal about the murder rate in Chicago they must criticize their own. Chicago has been/is a town governed by democrat machine politicians. How can the left really deeply criticize what happens there without having to face the fact that it is their politicians implementing their policies. Further, to look at the results leads to either one of two conclusions. 1. The policies implemented by the left leaning city/county government of Chicago/Cook county have failed miserably or 2. The years of leadership by the Daley/Obama/Emmanuel folks bear a high degree of responsibility for the conditions in the city/county. In this case they can’t blame republicans, nor can they blame lax gun control laws. It’s difficult to honestly and critically asses ones own side in a case like this. While there is certainly much legitimate and heartfelt grief for the victims and families, it’s hard to take any of the public posturing too seriously.

  5. John, you stated authoritatively…

    But it leaves me asking this: What does all this pomp on the part of liberals and Democrat politicians say about them that they are up in arms when these 20 fragile innocent little suburban white children are murdered, but for decades have been silent on the gun violence which has claimed the lives of thousands of young black men in the inner cities?

    Factually speaking, in the real world, progressives HAVE been up in arms about deadly violence and it HAS generally been because of violence against minorities and in urban settings. To suggest as if it were a real world phenomena that progressives/liberals don’t care or haven’t acted against gun violence is a demonstrable falsehood. I can point to my own church and other progressive churches here in Louisville. The evidence puts to lie your false suggestion. WE HAVE NOT BEEN SILENT.

    Your ignorance of a known reality does not make that reality not factual.

    Pay attention and you’d know this.

    The BEST chance you have of making your case would be to say that POLITICIANS (both conservative and liberal) have often been unwilling to address urban violence, but that is a slam against politicians of all stripes, not liberals.

    Your suggestion is demonstrably false, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and presume it is due to your own ignorance, but it is false nonetheless.

    Just to start you down the road of doing homework so you don’t speak from a position of ignorance in the future…

    http://www.un.org/disarmament/HomePage/HR/docs/2010/2010April30Global%20Week%20of%20Action%20against%20Gun%20Violence.pdf

    http://philadelphianeighborhoods.com/2010/12/14/northeast-religious-group-takes-action-against-gun-violence/

    http://rainbowpush.org/index.php/pages/1005/

    Yes, oftentimes DUE TO CONSERVATIVE PUSHBACK, progressives have not made as much headway against gun violence and lack of adequate care for the mentally ill, but CONSERVATIVE ACTION against our efforts don’t mean our actions don’t exist.

    Educate yourself, you are sounding foolish and being slanderous.

    • That’s wonderful, thank you for providing one national activist’s web page from earlier this year. The UN is not US an American politician. Now you can cite a press conference or legislation proposal by a national politician.

      Of course locally you’ll find activity, but nationally by politicians, you’ll have to dig. In fact if you see any, its after a huge event, like Aurora or Rep Giffords, or Newtown, ie after a bunch of white people are effected.

  6. C’mon John, How could you not know the Dan’s church has been at the forefront of this issue? ;)

  7. “Where are the conservative voices of outrage about the murder rate for minorities?”

    They are typically drowned out by the accusations that they are racist for daring to suggest that minorities are more violent then white folks.

    In all honesty, the *only* people I ever see decrying the high crime and murder rates of minorities are conservatives, while also suggesting possible solutions (none of which include more government handouts, I might add). The only time I see “progressives” come even close, it’s to attack racist white conservatives for being responsible somehow.

  8. On a serious note. P-BO’s been president for 4 years and he hasn’t touched this. Cities where the left is in charge are hotbeds of gun violence, But hey, it’s all conservatives fault.

  9. I don’t think to that to accuse the left of faux outrage is to imply that conservative outrage is sincere. Conservatives, I believe the point is, are not prone to using these types of incidents to pontificate about introducing more meaningless gun control policies.

    I will say, however, that every time a kid is killed as a result of gang related shootings, there is outrage. Rarely does it occur that multiple kids are killed by stray gang bullets. It doesn’t take more than one more child to die to result in marches and soap-box rantings that result in no change whatsoever. This is a common thing in Chicago.

    Now, we have Biden leading the charge. I feel so much safer now.

    • Marshal

      My point is that of the national picture. Of course there’s local activity and calls to end the violence. But on the national level by significant politicians like Congressmen Senators and the President, they’re all silent on the plagues of urban murders, but become quite vocal when a group of white kids get murdered. Of course they would too if it were a group of minorities, but as individual minorities, there’s nothing.

      I also wasn’t making the point that therefore conservatives care. Rather I was pointing out the apathy on the part of the political group who forever opines about their care for minorities.

  10. @John,

    The majority I have heard are pushing for an assault weapons ban and closing loopholes that allow convicted criminals from purchasing guns at gun shows. There may be a few fringe people looking to ban all guns, but seriously? Are those really “extreme” or “over the top” measures?

    • “The majority I have heard are pushing for an assault weapons ban… ”

      The problem is with the definition of an “assault” weapons. Those are already either banned, or so heavily restricted, they may as well be banned. The gun used in this recent killing was *not* an assault weapon, but people are calling it that because it looks scary. A lot of people include all semi-automatics as “assault” weapons; a definition that would mean pretty close to an all-gun-ban, since semi-automatic is standard now.

      “…and closing loopholes that allow convicted criminals from purchasing guns at gun shows.”

      I don’t know what sort of loopholes that would be (I’m in Canada, and we don’t have gun shows), but keeping guns out of the hands of criminals is not typically a point of contention. One would have to be clear about just who would be included under “criminal,” such as specifying people who committed violent crimes.

      This argument, however, is meaningless in context of this shooting. Lanza did not have a criminal record, nor do most mass murderers. Also, he tried to aquire a gun legally, and was unable to. The current laws technically worked. He was unable to get a gun through the usual channels. Obviously, that didn’t stop him from getting them illegally, by murdering his own mother. No law will stop a determined killer. This is why the focus on changing the gun laws is a strawman.

  11. @John,

    And you are seriously scraping the barrel here. A gunman shoots a bunch of kids and you accuse liberals of only caring cause they were white? Show me a single instance of minority students that were part of a similar massacre where liberals ignored it.

    Come on, give it a try.

    What exactly are you looking for so if I find it you don’t move goal posts on me. A national democratic leader talking specifically about inner city or minority gun violence prior to this recent incident? Is there a time restriction? What are we talking about here? Provided you don’t dubiously restrict criteria I can probably find it.

    • Austintx

      This is somewhat satirical. I just found it odd that while black youth are being massacred one at a time in our urban cities there is virtual silence on their deaths, and no one is blaming the guns. However when a suburban school is attacked and 20 children are killed, all of a sudden now something needs to be done about guns.

      Perhaps you could find a call for gun control from a national level politician BECAUSE of individual urban murders, but I doubt it.

      Its the hypocrisy of the left.

  12. What hypocrisy?

    Okay, I get that you’re backing away from your original claim…

    But it leaves me asking this: What does all this pomp on the part of liberals and Democrat politicians say about them that they are up in arms when these 20 fragile innocent little suburban white children are murdered, but for decades have been silent on the gun violence which has claimed the lives of thousands of young black men in the inner cities?

    You AREN’T speaking of liberals in general, just a few in Democratic leadership. Maybe – MAYBE – you can make THAT point. But that’s a far cry from the libelous suggestion that liberals as a whole don’t care about or haven’t acted upon violence against minorities. You appear to be backing away from that claim because it is a ridiculous claim.

    If you are backing away from that suggestion, then, well done – although you COULD be more clear about it – “My fault – I didn’t mean to suggest that liberals as a whole don’t care about or act against violence against minorities. That WOULD be a world-class stupid statement, my apologies if it sounded like that…”

    But then you come back with this “the hypocrisy of the Left” statement, which AGAIN sounds like you’re making an utterly false and demonstrably so generalization that is ignorant to an unbelievable level.

    How about making a completely clear clarification:

    ARE YOU suggesting “the Left” as a whole doesn’t care about or act on behalf of/in conjunction with the poor and people of color?

    OR, are you speaking only of national level Democrat politicians and maybe some Left-leaning pundits?

    Clarify who you are speaking about and then we can talk about the validity or stupidity of the statement.

  13. So, let’s take a look at your apparently toned-down claim (ie, not ALL liberals don’t care about people of color, but only a few democrat politicians)…

    Your claim appears to be this:

    GIVEN: There were two dozen white children killed all at once last week.

    GIVEN: Democrat politicians immediately have started taking action trying to affect gun restrictions as a response.

    GIVEN: When a black child was killed two weeks ago in Washington, DC and three weeks ago in Louisville, and four weeks ago in Santa Fe and five weeks ago in New York… and on and on, that ALL these black children being victims of violence did not cause an outcry amongst Democrats.

    THEREFORE: Democrats in Congress are racist, because they’re only dealing with violence against children when they’re white.

    Is that what your actual suggestion is?

    Because, even limiting it to politicians, there are huge holes in this reasoning.

    The biggest hold being this: a white child was killed by themselves two weeks ago. And another white child was killed three weeks ago. And another four weeks ago, and so on.

    In each of these killings of individual white children, Congress has not raised up to take action.

    Does that mean that Congress doesn’t care about white children?

    OR, isn’t it more reasonable to conclude that it simply means that when a LARGE atrocity happens, there is even more impetus to “do something,” and that this current outcry has nothing to do with the color of these children in this latest attack, and has everything to do with the large number of victims all at once.

    Do you really think that if this attack had been at a black school, that politicians would not have acted similarly?

    Unfortunately, dozens and hundreds of children being killed one at a time doesn’t get the same reaction (in Congress and across the nation) as a huge attack like this one.

    IF you want to make the case that WE – ALL OF US – are failing to deal with these individual attacks and violence as a whole, especially against children, then THAT would be a reasonable argument to make.

    Suggesting sweeping racism in these politicians is not.

    You forget that in the DEMOCRAT side of Congress, we have many black representatives (whereas the GOP has, what? One? Two?). Are you suggesting that THEY, too, are racist against BLACK KIDS?? That would be just ridiculous to suggest. Hopefully, you are beginning to recognize how unfounded and irrational your argument was.

    Best to take a look at what ALL of us can do to help decrease violence in general and violence against kids especially, rather than make unfounded and unsupported charges of racism where it doesn’t make a bit of sense.

  14. John,
    The problem is there’s no incentive for the dems in congress to do any more than speak indignantly for a few news cycles. The previous assault weapons ban was all but ineffective. The CT shooter broke enough laws before he got to the school to make any more laws unnecessary. It’s east to trot out the same old tired sound bites. It’s hard to actually look at theses problems and to be willing to take positions that might offend their backers. NRA contributions to politicians @$16 million, the top movies studios and the usual Hollywood suspects @$40 million. Does anyone seriously think we’ll hear any serious discussions about how movie violence affects kids. (Hint the CO theater shooter and the KY school shooter were both inspired by movie characters) Give this a week or two and it will all blow over, Biden’s group will regurgitate the same old tired crap, and the dems won’t actually do anything. It’s too bad that these tragedies get exploited for political purposes, but that’s the world we live in.

  15. I think this post is so off-base I can barely respond. It’s pretty obvious to me that killing elementary school children is a more outrageous act than adult-on-adult murder, although both are clearly bad. Many Democrats are constantly working to put limits on gun ownership. It can’t always be “front page news”. Reducing inner city crime is definitely part of the Democratic agenda. I am constantly getting emails exhorting me to contribute to gun control organizations that are working tirelessly to achieve what you Republicans are resisting. I just don’t understand this post at all!

Any Thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: