By Josh Marks

Gun Extremists Heckle Father Of Newtown Victim

January 29, 2013 3:09 pm Category: Memo Pad 68 Comments A+ / A-

First it was National Rifle Association president Wayne LaPierre’s bizarre post-Sandy Hook press conference calling for armed guards at schools. Then it was an NRA ad targeting President Obama’s children. Then the NRA released a shooting videogame for ages four and up. But the latest act by gun extremists is perhaps the most disturbing — Neil Heslin, father of 6-year-old Newtown victim Jesse, was heckled while giving testimony about new gun laws before a Connecticut legislative committee in the state capital of Hartford.

Some media analysts are questioning the use of the word “heckling” because Heslin, who sat next to a large framed picture of himself with his slain son, asked the audience why anyone in the room would need assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. But the question was clearly rhetorical, because audience members are not allowed to comment at a public hearing. So when two people in the audience shouted back about the Second Amendment in violation of this rule, it would seem to be heckling, the definition of which is to “interrupt (a public speaker) with derisive or aggressive comments or abuse.”

Here is a transcript of the part of the testimony that the incident occurred. Click here for the full, unedited video of Heslin’s nearly 16-minute testimony. The exchange happens around the 13:30 mark.

Heslin: “Having a child that you lost. It’s not a good feeling. It’s not a good feeling to look at your child laying in a casket, or look at your child with a bullet wound to the forehead. I ask if there is anyone in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question: Why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips? Not one person can answer that question.”

Heckler 1: “The Second Amendment shall not be infringed.”

Heckler 2: “You cannot infringe on our rights.”

Panel chair: “Please, please, no comments while Mr. Heslin is speaking or we will clear the room. Mr. Heslin, please continue.”

Heslin: “We’re all entitled to our own opinion, and I respect their opinions and their thoughts. But I wish they’d respect mine and give it a little bit of thought, and realize that it could have been their child that was in that school that day.”

Photo credit: Associated Press/Jessica Hill

Gun Extremists Heckle Father Of Newtown Victim Reviewed by on . First it was National Rifle Association president Wayne LaPierre's bizarre post-Sandy Hook press conference calling for armed guards at schools. Then it was an First it was National Rifle Association president Wayne LaPierre's bizarre post-Sandy Hook press conference calling for armed guards at schools. Then it was an Rating:

More by Josh Marks

Profiles In Cowardice And Courage From Our Shameful Senate: Mark Begich And Mark Kirk

On Tuesday 45 senators — mostly Republicans, but some Democrats — made cynical political calculations by choosing to protect the NRA gun merchants over America’s children, betraying the families of Newtown, CT, and the nation in their failure to pass stronger gun laws. It was expected that the right-wing Republicans in the Senate would reflexively

Read more...

Gabrielle Giffords Takes Gun Reform Push To Capitol Hill

On the sixth anniversary of the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history at Virginia Tech, former congresswoman and Tucson shooting survivor Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, retired astronaut Mark Kelly, headed to Capitol Hill to meet with senators in a final push to gather the 60 votes needed to add an expansion of background checks to

Read more...

Georgia Rep Says Romney Right About ’47 Percent’

Apparently Republican representative Rob Woodall of Georgia didn’t get the memo about his party’s “rebranding” effort to avoid offending half the population, or at least avoid getting caught doing it on camera. Woodall, who sits on Paul Ryan’s House Budget Committee, said last month at a town hall meeting that Mitt Romney was right in

Read more...

Tags

Comments

  • daniel bostdorf

    These fanatic extremists are cruel, shameless narcissists with no soul…here are the characteristics of this personality type:

    1. Shamelessness: Shame is the feeling that lurks beneath all unhealthy narcissism, and the inability to process shame in healthy ways.
    2. Magical thinking: Narcissists see themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking. They also use projection to dump shame onto others.
    3. Arrogance: A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.
    4. Envy: A narcissist may secure a sense of superiority in the face of another person’s ability by using contempt to minimize the other person.
    5. Entitlement: Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority.
    6. Exploitation: Can take many forms but always involves the exploitation of others without regard for their feelings or interests.
    7. Bad boundaries: Narcissists do not recognize that they have boundaries and that others are separate and are not extensions of themselves. Others either exist to meet their needs or may as well not exist at all

    NRA and Ted Nugent anyone?
    How about the guy below? Click in image.

    • http://twitter.com/geerue geerue

      That says it ALL. Thank you. Helps me understand some relatives!

    • http://www.facebook.com/dominick.vila.1 Dominick Vila

      Well said Daniel. I can’t believe the cruelty and insensitivity of people that would go as far as heckling a grieving parent. This incident highlights the level of hatred, and the fear, of those who believe they need assault rifles and high capacity magazines to defend themselves against fellow Americans and our government.
      Their constant references to the Second Amendment ignore the fact that our Constitution does, indeed, grant us the right to bear arms “to form a well regulated militia”. I doubt the Founders intended for every Tom, Dick and Harry to run around with weapons of mass destruction so that Americans can defend themselves from one another. What the arms industry, and the NRA are saying, are pure, unadulterated, lies and hyperbole designed to inflame passions by taking advantage of the paranoia and fear of those who cannot cope with adversity or societal changes that are unacceptable to some.

    • roguerunners

      lana ward anyone?

      • amazonfan

        :D

    • WhutHeSaid

      Hey — where did you get that photo of MontanaBill?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/XPL7LVHHKZXB3BKEJZNTKRMBYY Susan

      Sounds just like my ex-husband.

  • ChristoD

    Actually the simple response for him would have been to stand up and ask a simple question: ‘Where is your humanity you a—— ? Followed by a statement: ‘F— you and your right to bear arms especially ASSAULT rifles intended strictly to kill people’.

  • montanabill

    I suspected I might find this biased report on the National Memo. Anyone who actually cares for the truth will listen or watch the actual event. Mr. Heslin, when issuing his statement, turned to the audience, raised his arms and made his statement as a question. The audience responded. It was not a heckle.

    Nor does this report mention Mark Mattioli who lost his six year old son. “I don’t care if you named it ‘James’ law,’ I don’t want (another law),” he said, “I think there’s much more promise for a solution in identifying, researching and creating solutions along the lines of mental health.” Mattioli urged lawmakers to address the culture of violence.

    “It’s a simple concept. We need civility across our nation,” he said. “What we’re seeing are symptoms of a bigger problem. This is a symptom. The problem is not gun laws. The problem is a lack of civility.”

    He received a standing ovation following his comments.

    • lana ward

      The Memo is as bad as the MSM, they NEVER give all of the story in any of their reports!!

      • ObozoMustGo

        lana… they have to lie, otherwise they have no point to make. All leftist thinking is based on lies. It has to be. Otherwise, nobody would buy it but the biggest idiots out there.

        Have a great day!

    • WhutHeSaid

      It was, in fact, a heckling. I listened to both Mr. Heslin’s statements and the audience’s responses. Had the audience members actually answered his repeated question (rhetorical or not) of “why does anyone need an assault weapon?”, then perhaps we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

      I’ve always supported the 2nd Amendment, but had I been sitting in that audience facing a parent who just went through the worst nightmare that any parent can face in life — I would have just kept my big mouth shut. He asked a reasonable question; it deserved a reasonable answer, or barring that, simple silence.

      • ObozoMustGo

        what…. why don’t you take your own advice and keep your big mouth shut around here? You should remain quiet. It’s in your best interest.

        Have a nice day!

        “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt.” – Mark Twain

        • WhutHeSaid

          I think you should go back to doing what you do best: Humping Rush Limbaugh’s leg. At least *somebody* appreciates that, unlike your moronic ramblings in this forum.

      • montanabill

        He asked the audience a general question and a number of members of the audience answered it simultaneously. That hardly qualifies as heckling.

        • WhutHeSaid

          It was a rhetorical question, but a reasonable one. None of the audience responses were attempts to answer that question, so while perhaps it wasn’t the most obnoxious heckling I’ve ever witnessed it was still a form of heckling.

          • montanabill

            If you watched the NBC version, you missed the long pause before he turned to the audience and asked his question. You also missed his response after the audience answered his question. NBC did another of their famous editing jobs which totally changed what really happened. Go find an unedited version.

          • WhutHeSaid

            I saw more than one version of the events, but to me there didn’t seem to be a significant difference. The audience was warned that comments were prohibited during the testimony, and for the most part they complied. But apparently the repeated rhetorical question of “does anyone in this room need an assault weapon?” was more than they could bear.

            As I said previously, it wasn’t the most obnoxious heckling that I’ve ever witnessed (far from it), and certainly wasn’t up to the vile and despicable standards of the Tea Party crowd — but a form of heckling it was nevertheless. But I do believe that everybody is beating a dead horse at this point.

          • montanabill

            If you saw the original, unedited version, you know that Mr Heslin said, “Why anybody in this room needs to have an, one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips.” Then he had a long pause, faced the audience and said, “Not one person can answer that question.” Several in the audience responded with short comments, not heckling. After the back and forth, Heslin didn’t appear one bit bothered by the interaction. He said, “Anyway, we’re all entitled to our own opinion, and I respect their opinions and thoughts, but I wish they’d respect mine and give it a little bit of thought.”

            Only NBC, the Huffington Post and National Memo labeled it, ‘heckling’.

          • WhutHeSaid

            I don’t know why you seem to think that because somebody sees things differently from you, that they must being seeing something different. The audience was told that they were not supposed to make remarks, comments, statements, exclamations, turtle-dove mating calls, etc. while Mr. Heslin was presenting testimony. They chose to make comments anyway, largely in response to Mr. Heslin’s repeated rhetorical question (as you yourself noted). The responses, however, were NOT answers — they were retorts such as “shall not be infringed”.

            Heckle (v): To interrupt (a public speaker, performer, etc.) by comments, questions, or taunts.

            It’s clear to me why the right-wing crowd is trying so desperately to deny that it was ‘heckling': They know that the behavior was ridiculous and makes them look bad. They know that their ridiculous behavior is (and has been) causing them to lose credibility all across America to the point that they are becoming more and more marginalized.

            While this was not an overly aggressive or obnoxious example of heckling, it WAS IN FACT A FORM OF HECKLING. Get over it and move on, because the longer you deny it the more foolish you appear.

          • montanabill

            From the many sources of news on the internet, it appears that you are in a very small minority.

          • WhutHeSaid

            Maybe I am, and maybe I’m not. It just isn’t a big deal to me either way. Why does it bother you so much, hmm? I’m sure you have an interesting reason for it.

    • ObozoMustGo

      Hey Montana… this is just another veiled form of yellow journalism so commonly practiced here at The Memo. Write a provacative headline that is an absolutely misleading statement and follow it up with a grain of the facts, but slanted in such a way as to hide the grain of facts behind hyperbole. It’s getting to the point that it’s easy to recognize The Memo writing formula where the saps the write are here can just fill in the blanks and bingo…. leftist freak story written. Most of these clowns are no talent fools.

      Have a great day!

      “If you don’t read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read THE MEMO you are misinformed.” — Mark Twain, edited by ObozoMustGo for context

      • WhutHeSaid

        You right-wing, nut-ball bigots are getting more desperate every day. It’s clear that America doesn’t listen to your bullshit, so why waste your breath? Save it for your buddies at the next neighborhood beer-fart contest or cross-burning where it will be appreciated.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    Actually, these gun nuts are pushing their weight around. They want zero gun laws. That’s the fastest route to government takeover for anarchists who are well armed and ideologically dangerous. These gun nuts should be immediately analyzed for their mental stability. Posthaste. If they haven’t the common decency to be honorably behaved to a man whose child is dead, what does that say about the kind of mental instability they are all showing all too clearly?

    • http://www.facebook.com/dominick.vila.1 Dominick Vila

      Somebody turned in an Air to Surface missile launcher in Washington State during a gun buyback event a couple of days ago! Can you believe that?

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/HFYZP2APYPP7H6PWS2ZDQRWFEQ Hillbilly

        At that same buy back event, there were people wanting to buy the guns that people was going to turn and offfering more money for the guns than the police could. I don’t know if it can be done legally but there should be a line or zone that people can’t go past to buy guns from individuals that are turning the guns in. The guy that had the missile launcher said he had been offered $200-$300 dollars for it but refused to sell it to an individual, he got $100 dollars from the police.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/KV2YCNDU755CHTULDVEIFTW7GE steven c

          Couldnt have been much of a missle launcher for 100 dollars.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Al-Metcalf/1149798574 Al Metcalf

            They turn the AR 15’s in for $200. So, just think about that for a moment, do you think it was THEIR AR 15? Gun buy backs, what a load of camel dung. As soon as they announce these buybacks this is probably what you hear in the illegals homes. Hey, Pablo, let’s go steal a couple of guns man because the stupid LA pd ( the same ones that shot up a newspaper deliverers truck) are paying cash with no question asked and I need my dope fix man. ha ha, yea, man, doesn’t that white cracker down the road have a shotgun or something, let’s steal that MFer’s gun and go sell it for $100 bucks man……

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/KV2YCNDU755CHTULDVEIFTW7GE steven c

        Those grenade launchers are for show only, I doubt that they work or the FBI would have been called in and those people would have been arrested. This is all rehtoric and propaganda by the government to help their cause in controlling the population. Its going to be interesting to see how all the people on the anti-gun bandwagon react when the government begins to shred the Bill of Rights after they successfully take away Second Amendment rights. If you think that is a wild accusation or someone who is a gun toting nut just going on a rant, take a a close look at how the Patriot Act takes away an individuals Fourth Amendment rights under the “domestic terrorism” clause.

    • http://www.facebook.com/elisabeth.gordon1 Elisabeth Gordon

      It says everything we need to know about them…everything.

    • jointerjohn

      Do they not realize that this is the type of behavior that will galvanize public opinion against them? I believe there are millions of Americans who don’t care much one way or the other about guns, but I hope behavior like this may awaken them from their apathy.
      It is true these hecklers lack common decency, but then “common” means customary, or in-line with what most of us accept and practice. Sadly it would be foolish for us to expect that from anyone who so treasures the capacity to gun other people down.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Al-Metcalf/1149798574 Al Metcalf

      You are obvious infected with the disease of LIBERALISM. Please visit a conservative talk show soon and try to reverse the brainwashing you have had by the leftist media so that stupid things no longer come forth from your yack hole.

  • mncold

    I’m tired of hearing about their second amendment rights – if it was their kids they’d be crying just like everyone else. Don’t want to say I wish them back luck – but ya I do.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/VTV55S5BALQIDBQFOLH7WIZNSA Don B

    All the gun nuts with military grade weapons should be drafted into the Army. that way they can go out and shoot their weapons in a “sanctioned” manner. We’d save tons of money by drafting them so we don’t have to hire the private goons from Xi.

  • ObozoMustGo

    This article is presented as a lie in it’s headline. You are stretching the definition of “heckling” to severe degree, and you know it, Josh. Anyone that wants to can go listed to the actual audio of the presser and you will NOT hear one single person heckling Mr. Heslin. NOT ONE! The person that said “the 2nd Amendment” was responding to a question Mr. Heslin posed to the audience. That’s all.

    Guess facts really aren’t of much interest to you leftist freaks anyway. Why let the facts get in the way of a good emotional outburst? Why bother trying to think beyond what you read when it satisfies your emotionally based viewpoint? No need. The Memo and their cadre of useful idiots will tell you how to think.

    Have a nice day!

    “Reading furnishes the mind only with materials of knowledge; it’s thinking that makes what we read ours.” ― John Locke

    • WhutHeSaid

      Just out of curiosity: Does Rush pay you to come out here and post nonsense that nobody here ever believes? Perhaps in pain pills?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EP7SYOXT6F67RKSC4TDJVWXQQI D.

      Interesting. You’re kind of a one trick pony, always making it clear how much you despise The Memo and the people who make comments on it contrary to your way of thinking. And yet you keep returning. I can’t figure out whether you have masochistic tendencies, need somewhere to spill hate, or what.

      • ObozoMustGo

        It’s not The Memo, per se, that I despise. It’s you leftist freaks that I despise. There are some on here that are liberals and NOT leftist freaks in support of oppressive government, but they are few and far between. Most of the morons on here are socialists. Just calling it as I see it, D.

        Have a nice day!

        “In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.” — Voltaire (1764)

        • amazonfan

          Freaks, morons, idiots. Yeh, you would know all about that.

  • Lovefacts

    Republicans talk about the breakdown of family. I read this article and see a breakdown of civil society. Even back in our old west days, no one would have reacted like these hecklers. In fact, in the late 1800s many frontier towns demand weapons be turned into the sheriff upon entry and will be returned only upon leaving.

    Some letters talk about the rise of anarchy. No kidding. Forget rule of the majority or minority. It will be rule by the most heavily armed who only want what they want and anyone who disagrees can have an appointment with a bullet.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Joan-Maurer/100000910841619 Joan Maurer

    I would not call this exchange heckling. We do them a dis service in this instance by getting all up in arms by stupid answers to an obviously rethorical question.

    They really WILL show their lack of compassion and empathy at some point soon so I suggest we save our outrage for something more outragous. Just wait, it will come, they can not help themselves.

    The 24/7 news cycle and FOX news scare tactics get them all worked up, poor things.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5PYLGL23N545I3A25FLLFWEIKM sugarbritches

    No one has suggested that gun rights be taken. They are trying to find ways to get these dangerous weapons from the hands of mentally deranged people. Wayne LaPierre has done a tremendous disservice to the people of this country, including children, bby suggesting otherwise.

    • DEFENDER88

      If you really want to reduce these mass killings, stop giving these new designer drugs/anti-depressants to your kids at home. Unless you are going to restrain them.
      Most of the mass killings have been done by young men on these drugs. They kill their parents then head to the local school, church, theater, etc.
      Prozac(Virginia Tech), Effexer(Columbine), Zoloft, Ritalin, Livox, etc.
      I am old enough to know that this was not a problem before about 15 or so yrs ago when this started becoming a real problem.
      Never heard of ADHD before about 15 yr ago – sounds like an excuse for not getting your ass busted.
      That is what has changed in this country.
      There have always been many assault rifles in this country.
      In the past if kids needed to be drugged they were institutionalized where they could be controlled. It is out of control now.
      Another good idea gone horribly wrong like Gun Free Zones with no security, and self medicate them without constraint.
      As a last note – I am hearing latest news that Sandy Hook killing was done by a hand gun not an assault rifle. “Technically” that is very possible. At those ranges a hand gun can do as much if not more damage.

      • WhutHeSaid

        The Sandy Hook killings were little kids ripped apart by .223 bullets. Some were shot as many as 11 times. There’s a world of difference between a ‘Bushmaster’ AR-15 and any handgun, although I agree that without the deranged individual behind it neither would kill children.

        I’ve always supported the 2nd Amendment, but these types of killings are too much. I don’t think that banning assault weapons will stop things like this from happening altogether, nor will any other single policy change such as enhanced background checks or better mental health resources. But something clearly needs to be done, and reasonable people can’t deny it.

        • DEFENDER88

          Hello Whut
          I see your pain and frustration and actually share it.
          Thing is – I think we should concentrate on “Stopping the Killings”.
          Not on “banning” a certain weapon. Which has shown not to work.
          I see that as emotional knee jerk reaction – understandable as it is. Cant get much more gut wrenching than killing children.

          But just yesterday, I asked some police instructors, I train with, if a mid range power (9mm) hand gun could do as much or maybe even more damage at close range like Sandy Hook. They ALL agreed with me that it could.
          A 9mm hand gun bullet is 1.6 times bigger than a .223 AR Bullet.
          And that is a mid-range, mid-power size.
          Also I am hearing that the Sandy Hook killing was done with a Hand Gun. And Columbine, Ft Hood, VT, Giffords, etc – all done with hand guns.
          The most common links to most of the “mass” killings is
          1-Gun Free Zones, and
          2- Young White Men on Depressants
          My points are we should concentrate on things that will have the most impact in the shortest time ie
          1 – Security At Gun Free Zones
          2 – Controls on these Designer/Depressant Drugs and the people who use them – how, when, where, etc
          And I would add
          A psyc test for gun permits

          ie Look at the Root Causes then develope solutions accordingly.
          Then implement the ones that will have the most immediate impact 1st.

          Lastly – as a competitive pistol shooter, I can tell you that you can change a pistol mag faster than an AR mag. Any good pistol shooter can out shoot an AR shooter in overall speed and accuracy at close range.
          Also – AR’s account for a tiny fraction of the gun crime in the US.
          But the most publicised.

          • WhutHeSaid

            Come on — let’s be serious here. A .223 bullet or 9mm bullet will both kill you — no doubt about it. But the .223 has far more kinetic energy than the 9mm, and is effective at a far greater range. Let me ask you this: Which would you rather have to try to survive — a 9mm handgun attack or one with an AR-15?

            What you are ‘hearing’ about mass shooting appears to be incorrect. Yes, there were handguns involved in all of those shootings, but the carnage was mostly caused by the assault weapon rounds.

            Please be serious when you talk about these things. I know full well that you’d rather not engage in a fire-fight with somebody armed with an AR-15 when your weapon is a 9mm handgun. I don’t believe that banning assault weapons will cure the problem, but the argument against a civilian needing this type of weapon is a valid one.

        • DEFENDER88

          I hope you know I want the killing to stop as much as you.
          But also want to implement solutions that will actually work.
          That is just as important to me as the 2nd Amendment.
          And I think you feel the same.
          We just disagree on Primary Root Causes and solutions that will work.

          If I am in a CQB(Close Quarter Battle) situation ie close range, I would just as soon have a hand gun, even facing an AR.

          At mid range 50-300yd an AR.
          Longer range a 308, 30-06, 7mm Mag, etc

          I dont even like saying this ie “shooting children in a class room”. Gives me chills.
          But for “that” it really does not matter if it is an AR or a 9mm.

          If you are shooting 300 # men then I might agree an AR would be more “effective”.
          But for “children” at close range, a 9mm is more than plenty enough.
          “Think” for 8yr old children a 9 is more than enough.
          For longer range, an AR is definitely better, but the killings are not happening at long range.

          But it is easier to quickly aquire multiple targets at close range with a hand gun.
          If shot in one arm you can still use the other.
          Shooting accurately from cover is easier.
          Mag changes are quicker and easier.
          Movement is easier.
          And a 9mm more than plenty enough to kill “children”.

          As for more kinetic energy and greater range of an AR – true – but these mass killings are being done at close range.

          Columbine, VT, Giffords – all these were done by hand gun at close range.
          And all by young white men on designer anti-depressant drugs.
          I understand the Sandy Hook killer was on one or more of these.

          I am hearing reporting of Sandy Hook has been wrong and it was done by hand gun also but cannot confirm that.

          You dont think these anti-depressant drugs being fed to young people are a leading indicator/problem?
          ie a root problem here?

          You dont think providing security for Gun Free Zones should be done, and soon? Especially schools with children?
          This could be done NOW. And at least greatly reduce the killing.

          Are you old enough to remember that these mass killings were not happening before these new designer drugs were developed and then given to kids who were then sent home and under no restraint?

          This crap was not happening in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, like they are now.
          But there were, proportionatly, as many assault rifles in the US as now.
          But if a kid needed to be drugged he was sent to an institution and controlled.
          Not home where he could steal guns and kill everyone in sight.

          So I will know you are not biased – Please tell me you dont work for a drug Co.

          I am retired and I dont work for any gun or ammo related co., never have – Just so you will know I am not biased in that way.

          • WhutHeSaid

            I agree that ending this nonsense is the goal, but I do disagree with you somewhat regarding the 9mm vs. AR-15 argument. If I were in a normal environment, whether it be on the street, in an office, a theater, or even in a classroom (similar to an office) I would much prefer to take my chances with the 9mm. For one thing, the AR-15 is more accurate, period — even at close range. Second, the likelihood that I could find effective cover such as a desk, car, etc. is MUCH better against the weaker 9mm round. We aren’t talking about trained soldiers or firearm instructors — we’re talking about mentally disturbed individuals, civilians and children, for God’s sake. Finally, if I were forced to choose between being shot with a 9mm bullet or a .223 bullet I’d take my chances with the weaker 9mm hands down.

            Face it — an assault weapon has no real purpose in a civilian environment. If we could be sure that a mentally unbalanced person would never get possession of one, then the argument against banning them would be weaker. But in the case of the Newtown shooting, the firearm was purchased legally by the killer’s mother. If these types of weapons were not available, then he may have still committed mayhem, but it’s likely that it would’ve been less carnage. Is this a perfect solution? No, but then if giving up my chance to own an assault weapon would help save even a few of those children I would agree to it in a heartbeat — I don’t have any burning desire to own an assault rifle anyway.

            I hadn’t heard that drugs of any kind were involved in this shooting or any other recent similar event. I agree that mental health should be readily available for individuals that need it, but in this case the boy was apparently already under care. I don’t know if that means that there is any negligence on the part of his doctor(s) — perhaps there was. I’m open to any and all suggestions that might have a good chance of helping to prevent tragedies like this, and gun laws are only a piece of the puzzle. But I think we both share the belief that a serious discussion needs to take place, and serious action needs to follow.

            And no, I don’t work for a drug company or anything similar.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5PYLGL23N545I3A25FLLFWEIKM sugarbritches

    Wayne LaPierre is an outrageous and sick man! Surely there are people within the NRA who can address this issue with civility.

  • tcburch

    “I ask if there is anyone in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question: Why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips? Not one person can answer that question.””

    IF we look closely at Mr. Heslin’s comment and question, why is it out of line for an answer to be given by the people in attendance? Why are they being termed “Hecklers” when they were giving an answer to Mr. Heslin’s question, which in their point of view was acceptable when put forth in the manner in which it was? Just because we may disagree is not reason to distort the exchange into something much more contentious than it already is. I’m sorry if we all don’t agree on this, and yes the tragedies which have occurred due to the instability of the individuals committing these acts are horrific and upsetting. But, for both the NRA AND THE NATIONAL MEMO to promote either side by distortion should be just abhorrant to all people of reasonable thought as the actual acts themselves.

    As a side note, I have read and been told that, in the case of Sandy Hook an assault type weapon was not used in the actual killings. There was an assault “style” weapon present in the perp’s car but was not removed from that car or used in the commission of the crime.

    To have a cogent discussion on ANY subject, we have to get away from emotions by discarding those reports by the media which would attempt to sway otherwise straight thinking persons by appealing to those very emotions. They only serve to cloud one’s ability to reach a reasonable consensus.

  • dslocum

    The NRA supporters who heckled the grieving father have to be deranged if they are so lacking in compassion to publicly behave as they did. It was disgraceful. The NRA membership represents 1.4% of our population. Their influence should be considered accordingly. 98.6% of the population, including MOST gun owners are NOT in favor of the NRA. I’m a strong believer in the 2nd amendment, but there’s no place for assault weapons in the private sector.

  • http://www.facebook.com/nancy.lyttle.7 Nancy Lyttle

    Not only is the NRA and it’s adherents nothing more than Vigilantes and Bullies, they have now shown themselves to be devoid of ANY Moral Compass whatsoever!In a word, they are DISGRACEFUL! Never in my life did I ever imagine a time when Cretins would actually “heckle” the father of a Murdered child over INANE Gun Laws ALL over this Country! Let them KEEP their Hunting Rifles, Target Pistols and Registered Hand-guns for home security, but NO ONE needs a n Uzi or an AK-47 in their home arsenal with Multi-round clips and copper jacketed, hollow point bullets! One little boy, six years old, was shot ELEVEN times and had half his face blown off! WHAT is good about this kind of Fire-Power? Are there NO reasonable people LEFT in this Country?

  • bstockinger

    We need background checks on all gun purchases and we need to start fixing the mental health system in this country. I don’t think its unreasonable to do background checks on everyone who buys a gun. We even require new drivers to pass a driving test before they get a license.

    • highpckts

      Exactly! If you have nothing to hide then what is the big adoo about background checks?? If you feel your privacy is being invaded then don’t buy a gun!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1710087686 Bob Shipp

    I don’t have any comment except to urge the gun rights crowd to “Keep On Talking”. Their passion will be their downfall…..

    • WhutHeSaid

      Just keep in mind that not all people who believe in the 2nd Amendment are necessarily ‘gun nuts’. Many reasonable people who believe in the theory behind the ‘right to bear arms’ do not also believe that it means the right for anyone to possess any weapon. For example, there’s a big difference between a hunting rifle and an assault weapon like the AR-15. Both can kill, yes, but the AR-15 is designed specifically for a military-style assault — hence the name. Civilians do not need to engage in military-style assaults, and removing these types of weapons will not stop all killing, but it may be a reasonable compromise.

      Being sensible and responsible is the key. There are zealots on both sides of the issue, and zealots are never sensible. We need to have a serious discussion with the adults in the room (so to speak), and as far as I’m concerned the zealots from either side can wait outside while the adults come up with a realistic solution.

  • cliffb47

    The second Amendment to the US Constitution states as follows: “Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Please notice that it was ratified on December 15, 1791. At that time, our founding fathers had no concept whatsoever of “assault rifles or high capacity clips, or grenade launchers, etc.”

    All they knew were single shot muskets, and pistols. Let all the NRA members and gun nuts own as many guns of the exact type that were available on December 15, 1791.

    • WhutHeSaid

      Well, that’s fine, and you can post your next opinion with the same model of computer that was available on 12/15/1791. Make sense?

      • cliffb47

        Sure does.

        To paraphrase some esteemed leader of the NRA from a few years back: Computers don’t kill people, people kill people. (Never said it would stop the killing by guns.)

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KWMCTLJJ2FHD3NPDJG6TAD467I Jesse Fell

      Cliifb47, Good points. It’s also worth pointing out that the Second Amendment does not protect the right to bear arms for any personal, private purposes. It protects the right only so that the government will be able form, ad hoc, militias of self-armed citizens for any of three purposes: “to enforce the laws, to suppress insurrection, and to repel invasion.” Article 1, VIII, 15. There is not a word in the Constitution about any private purposes, such as self-protection, and least of all about opposing the government — that would be insurrection! We have gone roughly 200 years without resort to militias — the National Guard does not qualify, since the government provides the weapons for guardsmen, and the distinguishing mark of a militia is that its members be self armed. The Second Amendment, like the Third, is an anachronism, and IMHO, there is a strong case for repealing these amendments as they are written and replace them with an amendment that defines gun rights, and the government’s right to regulate gun ownership, in terms that make sense to us today.

      • WhutHeSaid

        Yes, bearing arms against the government would indeed be ‘armed insurrection’, but you have to remember that the people who founded this country did exactly that. The best legal minds have debated the 2nd Amendment for centuries now, and if they could not agree on the exact meaning then it’s doubtful that such agreement is forthcoming. Repealing the 2nd Amendment is one solution, but it is a drastic step to take and is extremely unlikely. A better idea is to seriously discuss what can be effective without going to such an extreme. Even if we were to repeal the 2nd Amendment and outlaw every firearm there is no guarantee that it would be successful. Keep in mind that street drugs have been outlawed for a long time EVERYWHERE, and they are still readily available ANYWHERE.

  • 0126020451

    They are taking this Second amendment too far. 2nd Amendment: A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Bearing Arms: Each State has the right to maintain a militia, and an armed force for its own protection–today, the National Guard, The National Government and the States can and do regulate the private possession and use of firearms. For a man to sit and heckle a father who is still grieving the lost of a son gives you an insight into the mentality of the people who want to hoard guns. They need to do research as to the time and circumstances when this amendment was written.

  • WhutHeSaid

    I agree that ending this nonsense is the goal, but I do disagree with you somewhat regarding the 9mm vs. AR-15 argument. If I were in a normal environment, whether it be on the street, in an office, a theater, or even in a classroom (similar to an office) I would much prefer to take my chances with the 9mm. For one thing, the AR-15 is more accurate, period — even at close range. Second, the likelihood that I could find effective cover such as a desk, car, etc. is MUCH better against the weaker 9mm round. We aren’t talking about trained soldiers or firearm instructors — we’re talking about mentally disturbed individuals, civilians and children, for God’s sake. Finally, if I were forced to choose between being shot with a 9mm bullet or a .223 bullet I’d take my chances with the weaker 9mm hands down.

    Face it — an assault weapon has no real purpose in a civilian environment. If we could be sure that a mentally unbalanced person would never get possession of one, then the argument against banning them would be weaker. But in the case of the Newtown shooting, the firearm was purchased legally by the killer’s mother. If these types of weapons were not available, then he may have still committed mayhem, but it’s likely that it would’ve been less carnage. Is this a perfect solution? No, but then if giving up my chance to own an assault weapon would help save even a few of those children I would agree to it in a heartbeat — I don’t have any burning desire to own an assault rifle anyway.

    I hadn’t heard that drugs of any kind were involved in this shooting or any other recent similar event. I agree that mental health should be readily available for individuals that need it, but in this case the boy was apparently already under care. I don’t know if that means that there is any negligence on the part of his doctor(s) — perhaps there was. I’m open to any and all suggestions that might have a good chance of helping to prevent tragedies like this, and gun laws are only a piece of the puzzle. But I think we both share the belief that a serious discussion needs to take place, and serious action needs to follow.

    And no, I don’t work for a drug company or anything similar.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001496054202 Suzanne Black-Jenkins

    It’s a real shame that money can buy legislation! That’s exactly what the NRA does: it receives huge amounts of money from the gun manufacturing industry and uses that money to buy the White House! But now, the White House isn’t buying! I believe people are finally opening their eyes to the destruction guns can do. Guns are manufactured for one purpose only and that is to kill! Shame on gun activists who even had the nerve to open their mouths when this devoted father was trying to put his grief of losing his son into words! Shame on the NRA for confusing the 2nd Amendment; because sadly, most people are not educated in Constitutional Law!

  • daffodilly

    They want us to think that the deaths of multiple children who are unknown to them is a reasonable price to preserve their “right” to posess assault guns in order to “protect” themselves and their children from the likes of folks who would use assault guns. They don’t care about their families or anyone else’s. Just juvenile shoot-em-up bang-bang cops and robbers, cowboys and indians. Pure midnight fantasy that gets real people killed and real families torn apart.

  • spirit_of_58

    I’m anti-gun, but I have to say that the headline is misleading & sensationalist.

  • Considerthis

    I watched the full thing. Mr Heslin was finished, and was prodded by people off camera, “talk about gun, guns!” so if anyone heckled him, it was those people! However he started talking again. Everyone was very respectful. Then he asked a question of everyone or anyone present, everyone expecting he would continue his talk sat patiently, but he said,” No one, can answer my question.” several people responded to this at one time. If he was heckled it was by the anti-gun people off camera. He was finished talking! You should be ashamed.

scroll to top