This was emailed to me from Michael Farrow, who knows me from another organization that I am active with.
He brings up some interesting points. And I am sure that it will spark some controversy, but maybe that is what this forum needs. So feel free to agree or disagree, and share your viewpoint.

The Tragedy at Newtown, CT.
What can we learn?
Another horrible crime has been committed by an apparently mentally unstable young man. Even though it is early in the investigation and there is a lot we don’t yet know, we have an opportunity to analyze what we do know in order to try to minimize the possibility of this kind of thing happening again. As our sympathy goes to the families in Newtown, consider the following:
1) The first obvious conclusion is that if such a horrible thing can happen in a small (one traffic light), peaceful town, there is no place in the world that is safe.
2) According to recent reports, the shooter continued the slaughter until he heard approaching sirens. He then killed himself. People with guns stopped it by showing up. He apparently would have continued killing until he was out of ammunition or some armed person arrived to make him stop.
3) The gun-free zones, including this school, are particularly vulnerable to armed attackers. If there had been one or two armed people at the school, whether Law Enforcement, guards or staff, the attack may not have happened at all and certainly would not have resulted in so many deaths.
4) The old saying, “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.” The local police responded very quickly, but they were not in time to prevent so many deaths.
5) The weapons used in this attack were purchased and registered legally in a state that has very strict gun laws. Armed killers don’t really care what the law says. They are CRIMINALS. The shooter broke plenty of existing laws and having more laws would not have deterred him at all.
The news coverage is very gun-ignorant. On Fox News I saw a retired LEO, “Bo” Dietl, stating that the Bushmaster was on “full automatic.” None of the witnesses I’ve heard describe anything like automatic fire. If it was full auto, that is yet another law broken. Statements like Dietl’s are ignorant and inflammatory, but they seamlessly dovetail with news show rhetoric like, “Why would anyone need a semi-automatic ‘assault weapon’? Not for hunting, sporting or even self-defense.”
Finally, we as gun owners have to take seriously the NRA rule about gun storage:
“Store guns so that they are inaccessible to unauthorized persons.”

These are just my opinions and observations.
Respectfully,
Michael Farrow
12/17/12