E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAs Vice President Joe Biden prepares to present sweeping gun control proposals, residents of Newtown are speaking out. Meanwhile, investigators continue to examine what triggered Adam Lanza's rage. NBC's Michael Isikoff reports.
NEWTOWN, Conn. – Police Chief Michael Kehoe has a message for the White House: “Ban assault weapons, restrict those magazines that have so many bullets in them, shore up any loopholes in our criminal background checks,” he said in an exclusive interview with NBC News.
As Vice President Joe Biden prepares to present his gun violence proposals to the White House this week, the residents of Newtown — including first responders and some families of the victims — are speaking out on gun policy for the first time.
Few have a more personal connection to the issue than Kehoe: He was one of the first on the scene at the Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14 after reports came in of a shooting. He says he’s still haunted by flashbacks of what he witnessed when he entered the school from the rear -- the eerie silence in the hallways, the smell of burnt gunpowder and then the bodies of dead children on the floor of the classrooms.
“I was sickened. I was angry,” he said. “It was something I never could have imagined could have happened in any school in Newtown.”
But as a veteran law enforcement officer, what was most striking to Kehoe was that the gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, had heavier firepower than Kehoe and his officers. The police had Glock pistols with 14-round magazines; Lanza had a Bushmaster assault-style rifle, two handguns and multiple 30-round magazines that allowed him to squeeze off an estimated 150 shots.
Although it’s still not clear if Lanza ever fired at responding officers — Kehoe thinks he took his own life when he heard the police sirens — the disproportionate balance in firepower bothers him.
/
Newtown, Conn., Police Chief Michael Kehoe at a news briefing on Jan. 2.
“We never like to think we’re going to be outgunned in any situation we’re dealing with," he said. “We do a good job of securing dynamite in our society. … (Assault rifles) are another form of dynamite. … I think they should ban them.”
Kehoe’s comments come as a new grassroots group — called Sandy Hook Promise — is planning a news conference Monday in which residents of Newtown and some of the victims’ families plan to call for a “national conversation” on gun violence, mental health and school safety. The goal: to prevent “similar tragedies from ever taking place again.”
But there is far from unanimity about what should be done about guns.
Marie-Claude Duytschaever, the grandmother of 6-year-old Noah Pozner, the youngest victim that day, said she, too, wants a ban on assault rifles.
“Noah had the right to go to school safely,” she said. “He had the right to live, to have a job and a normal life. I think that’s more important than to have a gun that can obliterate a whole room in seconds.”
Sandy Hook Promise group will not call for specific gun control measures at Monday’s press conference and a few have expressed concerns that the White House is moving too rapidly with its proposals — and without seeking input from the families of the victims of Newtown.
Vice President Joe Biden will present his task force's gun policy recommendations this week – among them, most likely, to reinstate the assault weapons ban. NBC's Peter Alexander reports.
The national headquarters of the National Shooting Sports Foundation — the trade association and lobbying arm of gun manufacturers — is just down the road from the Sandy Hook Elementary School. Its representatives met with Biden’s task force last week, and this week it will hold its annual SHOT SHOW in Las Vegas, an event at which major gun makers get to exhibit their wares.
The group didn’t respond to requests for comment. But last week it posted this statement on its website: “Semi-automatic firearms are now the most popular type of firearm in America and are used for a wide variety of legitimate sporting purposes, including hunting, small game control, target shooting and personal defense. They should not be banned.”
It is not clear whether Biden will include a ban on assault weapons in the proposals he submits this week. Any effort to ban the rapid-fire rifles in the United States is expected to face tough opposition in Congress.
More from Open Channel:
- 'Zero Dark Thirty,' the CIA and 'enhanced interrogation techniques'
- Exclusive: DEA agents arranged prostitute for Secret Service agent
- Rossen Reports: Metal water bottles can endanger kids
Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
Gun nuts have their version of the Constitution which is a false one,and us sane Americans have the correct version. We laugh at your crazed paranoia.
I would have to say that the anti gun crowd are the one's showing unreasonable paranoia. The first thing you blame is guns. Something that you do not know or understand. I doubt that most of you have never purchased a gun of any type and thus do not know what one has to go through to buy one. Many of you obviously do not know the definition of "assault weapon". I have been a professional weapons expert for over fourteen years so I will try to educate you.
An assault weapon is a firearm designed to fire multiple rounds with a single squeeze of the trigger.
You will not find one single "assault weapon" in any local gun shop, sporting goods store or pawn shop.
"The Constitution s hall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. " --Samuel Adams
tony: Who is "we"? Do you have someone else living in your head with you?
Yeah, I thought the same thing when I read the "we". It's so much fun watching other people's mental illnesses manifest themselves.
You find mental illness funny? I guess you were ROTFL when the 20 small children and 6 loving adult women were murdered by a person with mental illness. Did you also find it "funny" that the response to this horror was lines of hundreds of mentally ill people waiting to buy a gun just like the mentally ill murderer?? I am amazed at the level of sickness displayed on this site. Paranoid people lying in wait in their basements, stockpiled with ammo and guns waiting for Alex Jones or (insert any other schill for the gun and dried food industry), to signal the start of the Revolution.
What an incredibly SICK sense of humor you have!
Thing is that violent crime and gun related deaths have been decreasing over the last decade while at the same time gun ownership has been on the rise.
You can check that with the FBI if you do not believe it.
So if guns kill than should gun related deaths not have gone up along with increased ownership.
Any ex- military personnel who is sane and responsible does NOT believe this crazed gun nut paranoia,but the crazed Rambo types I knew in the service and that my fellow soldiers couldn't stand,obviously buy into the gun nut culture. Your obsession with guns is rediculous. Your so crazed about guns unfortunately you can't think straight.
TONY- Please see someone who can help you address your irrational anger.
And the lies continue.
No one at that school was shot with a rifle. The government is lying to you. By doing so they can use it as an excuse to take away your right to own one. Before you fall into their trap, learn the truth. HE DID NOT TAKE THE RIFLE INTO THE SCHOOL.
The first day, ALL news reports said the shooting was done with two handguns. The story was changed the second day.
Arizona....
100-150 rounds with handguns? One kid took 11 bullets from a handgun? Really? You are smarter than that!
Wait...this is the ONE time you believe the media??? When it serves your paranoid purpose to justify stockpiling weapons and ammo?
In a scenario of mass murder and 100's of terrified children, first responders rushing from everywhere, and reporters freaked out by the horrific carnage and someone may have misstated what weapons were used and you will hold that as fact forever???
I seem to recall when the Twin Towers were destroyed on 9/11, many news reports stated that 150,000 people may have been killed. Much later the actual death toll was greatly reduced. Do you believe those first media reports also?
We know these weapons are assault types,not the actual assault weapons,keep playing that one,you sound like a broken record. Of course the gun nuts had their way there would NO weapons restrictions of any kind. That's for sure. The Wild West II would then return.
March 2007
25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.
Ok listen up all you rough and tough Rambo's and John Wayne's, the ban is coming, so stop the whining and stop the big bad boy/bad ass talk. They will put the ban in place and you so called internet big bad asses will comply simple as that
Of course the Chief supports the ban. He is hired and fired by a City Council form of government, which means an at will employee. Any Chief not supporting a ban on a weapon used to commit such a crime in his own town would be fired. I am not trying to minimize the tragic events which occurred, but that criminal act cost the people of that community a lot of the city budget in staffing, overtime, equipment, etc.
And even though he does support it...it is newsworthy to print his opinion for what reason???
I am a retired cop with over 32 years of service. Remember, when seconds count, the police are minutes away frm helping you.
"And even though he does support it...it is newsworthy to print his opinion for what reason???" What a ridiculous question! His opinion is important because the VP is soliciting input from all VICTIMS of gun violence and from gun rights advocates.
Make no mistake about this, he may be the police chief but he is also a victim of this horrible crime, as are all first responders. He may carry a badge and a gun but he is a HUMAN being and will NEVER forget what he saw and heard that day! As the chief he is also expected to be above those human emotions and be strong and comfort and protect the people of his town even though he is as devastated as they are!
You say you are a retired cop? Were you ever quoted in a newspaper or on TV in relation to something that happened in your community? Or was your chief ever quoted? Why was their opinion newsworthy, in your estimation, and not this man's opinion, as the chief who presided over the town whose murdered children and teachers affected the whole world???
TEN MYTHS ABOUT GUN CONTROL
MYTH 9 -- Concealed carry laws are dangerou
Note that I am getting this from Duke University.
Another anti -government conspiracy gun nut fruitcake,don't you love these crazed,paranoid,delusional people.And too think many are heavily armed. Is that a reason for concern or what? Most live in Red States too.
News on 12/14/2012:
From NBC.
"Federal law enforcement official says gunman at Connecticut school was a 20-year-old man from CT carrying two handguns."
From Oklahoma news 6.
"Orr reports that authorities found two guns on the gunman's body, a Glock 9 mm pistol and a Sig Sauer pistol. A Bushmaster assault rifle was found in the vehicle"
The next day the reporters changed the story to say he killed them with an "assault rifle". Anti-gun nuts jumped right on this lie. It was what they wanted to hear. Even if was a lie.
Be smart: look it up.
MYTH 1:"The majority of Americans favor strict new additional federal gun controls."
Polls can be slanted by carefully worded questions to achieve any desired outcome. It is a fact that most people do not know what laws currently exist; thus, it is meaningless to assert that people favor "stricter" laws when they do not know how "strict" the laws are in the first place. Asking about a waiting period for a police background check presumes, incorrectly, that police can and will actually conduct a check during the wait. Similarly, it is meaningless to infer anything from support of a 7- or 5-day waiting period when respondents live in a state with a 15-day wait or a 1-6 month permit scheme in place. Asked whether they favor making any particular law "stricter," however, most people do not. Unbiased, scientific polls have consistently shown that most people:
In 1993, Luntz Weber Research and Strategic Services found that only 9% of the American people believe "gun control" to be the most important thing that could be done to reduce crime. By a margin of almost 3-1, respondents said mandatory prison would reduce crime more than "gun control." This poll, unlike many others, allowed respondents to answer more honestly by using open ended questions without leading introductions. The result was an honest appraisal of the attitude of the American people: "gun control" is not crime control.
One clear example of a poll done which used biased questions and flawed procedures was conducted by Louis Harris Research Inc. (LHRI) in the summer of 1993. The poll reported unprecedented levels of gun abuse by high school students. However, after examining the poll, Professor Gary Kleck of Florida State University, the nation's leading scholar on crime and firearms, called the findings "...implausible, being inconsistent with more sophisticated prior research." Prof. Kleck found the Harris findings of students who had been shot at or who had actually shot at someone to be insupportable by crime and victimization statistics as reported by the Department of Justice: "Even if the percent of handgun crime victimization had doubled from the average for the 1979-1987 period, the LHRI results would still be overstated by a factor of 100." In the end, he labeled the LHRI poll "advocacy polling."1
people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm
The gun nuts a ret he people who have irrational anger,plus paranoia and delusions. Raise your hand if you believe in government conspiracies. I bet most of you gun nuts did. You people are beyond belief. And ANYONE who responds to my posts must be: a gun nut! That says it all!
Who are the ones calling for the murder of the head of the NRA and even NRA members. And for the murder of Alex Jones on Piers Morgan. Your "gun nuts" haven't threatened to kill anyone. "Irrational anger"only on the side of liberals.
Seriously?? You must really be selective about the news you watch! One of your "heroes" just got his gun permit pulled for posting a you tube video saying he was going to "start killing people". Our President has received more death threats than any other president. I'm pretty sure these threats are not coming from the people who voted for him. Rush, Sarah, Alex, Wayne, Glenn, etc., have been beating the drum for violence against anyone who disagrees with their view and making tons of money from your paranoia. Do some research!
It's good to hear a voice of reason and sanity, instead of the insane harping of the gun nutz and the NRA.
See a doctor about that "voice" you are hearing.
Breaking News
A semi-automatic handgun and several high capacity magazines took over the free will of a young man in Chicago today forcing him to load and fire the firearm into a crowd of people. The gun and magazines then escaped and are on the loose. The young man thanks God the gun did not turn on him, fleeing when authorities began arriving. The gun and magazines are described as black and menacing looking. More details as they become available.
MYTH 2: "The only purpose of a handgun is to kill people."
This often repeated statement is patently untrue, but to those Americans whose only knowledge of firearms comes from the nightly violence on television, it might seem believable. When anti-gun researcher James Wright, then of the University of Massachusetts, studied all the available literature on firearms, he concluded: "Even the most casual and passing familiarity with this literature is therefore sufficient to believe the contention that handguns have `no legitimate sport or recreational use.' "
There are an estimated 65-70 million privately owned handguns in the United States that are used for hunting, target shooting, protection of families and businesses, and other legitimate and lawful purposes. By comparison, handguns were used in an estimated 13,200 homicides in 1992 --less than 0.02% (two hundredths of 1%) of the handguns in America. Many of these reported homicides (1,500-2,800) were self-defense or justifiable and, therefore, not criminal. That fact alone renders the myth about the "only purpose" of handguns absurd, for more than 99% of all handguns are used for no criminal purpose.
By far the most commonly cited reason for owning a handgun is protection against criminals. At least one-half of handgun owners in America own handguns for protection and security. A handgun's function is one of insurance as well as defense. A handgun in the home is a contingency, based on the knowledge that if there ever comes a time when it is needed, no substitute will do. Certainly no violent intent is implied, any more than a purchaser of life insurance intends to die soon.
people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm
MYTH 3:"Since a gun in a home is many times more likely to kill a family member than to stop a criminal, armed citizens are not a deterrent to crime."
This myth, stemming from a superficial "study" of firearm accidents in the Cleveland, Ohio, area, represents a comparison of 148 accidental deaths (including suicides) to the deaths of 23 intruders killed by home owners over a 16-year period. 2
Gross errors in this and similar "studies"--with even greater claimed ratios of harm to good--include: the assumption that a gun hasn't been used for protection unless an assailant dies; no distinction is made between handgun and long gun deaths; all accidental firearm fatalities were counted whether the deceased was part of the "family" or not; all accidents were counted whether they occurred in the home or not, while self-defense outside the home was excluded; almost half the self-defense uses of guns in the home were excluded on the grounds that the criminal intruder killed may not have been a total stranger to the home defender; suicides were sometimes counted and some self-defense shootings misclassified. Cleveland's experience with crime and accidents during the study period was atypical of the nation as a whole and of Cleveland since the mid-1970s. Moreover, in a later study, the same researchers noted that roughly 10% of killings by civilians are justifiable homicides. 3
The "guns in the home" myth has been repeated time and again by the media, and anti-gun academics continue to build on it. In 1993, Dr. Arthur Kellermann of Emory University and a number of colleagues presented a study that claimed to show that a home with a gun was much more likely to experience a homicide.4 However, Dr. Kellermann selected for his study only homes where homicides had taken place--ignoring the millions of homes with firearms where no harm is done--and a control group that was not representative of American households. By only looking at homes where homicides had occurred and failing to control for more pertinent variables, such as prior criminal record or histories of violence, Kellermann et al. skewed the results of this study. Prof. Kleck wrote that with the methodology used by Kellermann, one could prove that since diabetics are much more likely to possess insulin than non-diabetics, possession of insulin is a risk factor for diabetes. Even Dr. Kellermann admitted this in his study: "It is possible that reverse causation accounted for some of the association we observed between gun ownership and homicide." Law Professor Daniel D. Polsby went further, "Indeed the point is stronger than that: 'reverse causation' may account for most of the association between gun ownership and homicide. Kellermann's data simply do not allow one to draw any conclusion."5
people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm
Another thing that is true about the majority of these gun nuts is that they are scared,very scared, Mention the words: gun regulations and they run off to a gun shop to buy more guns. They think guns make them tough and sooth their fear and paranoias.
Not allowed to own one, eh?
You should be scared too. Anybody who trusts this government to do the right things is a nut. The words gun regulation have the best gun selling slogan in history. By their very actions, gun control activists are causing the very things they hate, the proliferation of guns, more than ever. Liberals should just stfu (like you Tony)
MYTH 4:"Honest citizens have nothing to fear from gun registration and licensing which will curb crime by disarming criminals."
"Gun control" proponents tout automobile registration and licensing as model schemes for firearm ownership. Yet driving an automobile on city or state roads is a privilege and, as s uch, can be regulated, while the individual right to possess firearms is constitutionally protected from infringement. Registration and licensing do not prevent criminal misuse nor accidental fatalities involving motor vehicles in America, where more than 40,000 people die on the nation's highways each year. By contrast, about 1,400 persons are involved in fatal firearm accidents each year.
Registration and licensing have no effect on crime, as criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. Indeed, a national survey of prisoners conducted by Wright and Rossi for the Department of Justice found that 82% agreed that "gun laws only affect law-abiding citizens; criminals will always be able to get guns."
Further, felons are constitutionally exempt from a gun registration requirement. According to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Haynes v. U.S., since felons are prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, compelling them to register firearms would violate the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. 8 Only law-abiding citizens would be required to comply with registration--citizens who have neither committed crime nor have any intention of doing so.
Registration and licensing of America's 60-65 million gun owners and their 200 million firearms would require the creation of a huge bureaucracy at tremendous cost to the taxpayer, with absolutely no tangible anti-crime return. Indeed, New Zealand authorities repealed registration in the 1980s after police acknowledged its worthlessness, and a similar recommendation was made by Australian law enforcement. Law enforcement would be diverted from its primary responsibility, apprehending and arresting criminals, to investigating and processing paperwork on law-abiding citizens.
people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm
MYTH 5 "Stiff `gun control' laws work as shown by the low crime rates in England and Japan, while U. S crime rates continue to soar."
All criminologists studying the firearms issue reject simple comparisons of violent crime among foreign countries. It is impossible to draw valid conclusions without taking into account differences in each nation's collection of crime data, and their political, cultural, racial, religious, and economic disparities. Such factors are not only hard to compare, they are rarely, if ever, taken into account by "gun control" proponents.9
Only one scholar, attorney David Kopel, has attempted to evaluate the impact of "gun control" on crime in several foreign countries. In his book The Samurai, The Mountie and The Cowboy: Should America adopt the gun controls of other democracies?, named a 1992 Book of the Year by the American Society of Criminology, Kopel examined numerous nations with varying gun laws, and concluded: "Contrary to the claims of the American gun control movement, gun control does not deserve credit for the low crime rates in Britain, Japan, or other nations." He noted that Israel and Switzerland, with more widespread rates of gunownership, have crime rates comparable to or lower than the usual foreign examples. And he stated: "Foreign style gun control is doomed to failure in America. Foreign gun control comes along with searches and seizures, and with many other restrictions on civil liberties too intrusive for America. Foreign gun control...postulates an authoritarian philosophy of government fundamentally at odds with the individualist and egalitarian American ethos."10
America's high crime rates can be attributed to re volving-door justice. In a typical year in the U.S., there are 8.1 million serious crimes like homicide, assault, and burglary. Only 724,000 adults are arrested and fewer still (193,000) are convicted. Less than 150,000 are sentenced to prison, with 36,00 0 serving less than a year (U.S. News and World Report, July 31, 1989). A 1987 National Institute of Justice study found that the average felon released due to prison overcrowding commits upwards of 187 crimes per year, costing society approximately $430, 000.
people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm
Some gun nuts think the more weapons and the more powerful weapons they have the tougher they are. These Rambo wannabes live in a fantasy world of guns hysteria.
Ok listen up all you rough and tough Rambo's and John Wayne's, the ban is coming, so stop the whining and stop the big bad boy/bad ass talk. They will put the ban in place and you so called internet big bad asses will comply simple as that
Spot- I do not believe that they will get the votes to pass it.
Run spot run.
MYTH 6: "Most murders are argument-related `crimes of passion' against a relative, neighbor, friend or acquaintance. "
The vast majority of murders are committed by persons with long established patterns of violent criminal behavior. Acc ording to analyses by the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency, the FBI, and the Chicago, New York City, and other police departments, about 70% of suspected murderers have criminal careers of long standing--as do nearly half their victims. FBI data show that roughly 47% of murderers are known to their victims.
The waiting period, or "cooling-off" period, as some in the "gun control" community call it, is the most often cited solution to "crimes of passion." However, state crime records show that in 1992, states with waiting periods and other laws delaying or denying gun purchases had an overall violent crime rate more than 47% higher and a homicide rate 19% higher than other states. In the five states that have some jurisdictions with waiting periods (Georgia, Kansas, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia), the non-waiting period portions of all five states have far lower violent crime and homicide rates.
Recent studies by the Justice Department suggest that persons who live violent lives e xhibit those violent tendencies "both within their home and among their family and friends and outside their home among strangers in society." A National Institute of Justice study reveals that the victims of family violence often suffer repeated problems from the same person for months or even years, and if not successfully resolved, such incidents can eventually result in serious injury or death. A study conducted by the Police Foundation showed that 90% of all homicides, by whatever means committed, in volving family members, had been preceded by some other violent incident serious enough that the police were summoned, with five or more such calls in half the cases.
people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm
1776
MYTH 7:"Semi-automatic firearms have no legitimate sporting purpose, are the preferred weapon of choice of criminals, and should be banned."
Use of this myth by gun prohibitionists is predicated purely on pragmatism: whichever "buzzword" can produce the most anti-gun emotionalism--"Saturday Night Special," "assault weapons," and "plastic guns"--will be utilized in efforts to generate support for a ban on entire classes of firearms.
Examples of this anti-gun legislative history abound. A Saturday Night Special" ban bill enacted in Maryland establishes a politically appointed "Handgun Roster Board" with complete authority to decide which handguns will be permitted in the so-called "Free State"-- any handgun could therefore be banned. Federal legislation aimed at the nonexistent "plastic gun" would have banned mil lions of metal handguns suitable for personal protection. In the 1994 crime bill, Congress did ban semi-automatic "assault weapons," based on their cosmetic appearance. After passage, however, not even the virulently anti-gun Washington Post pretended the ban would have a crime fighting effect, labeling it "mainly symbolic."
Criminals and law-abiding citizens both follow the lead of police and military in choosing a gun. Criminals generally pick as handguns .38 Spl. and .357 Mag. revolvers, with ba rrels about 4" long and retailing (an unimportant matter for criminals) at over $200. Only about one-sixth fit the classic description of the so-called "Saturday Night Special"--small caliber, short barrel and inexpensive. While criminals are unconcerned with the cost of a firearm, the law-abiding certainly are. A ban on inexpensive handguns will have a disproportionate impact on low income Americans, effectively disarming them. This is particularly unfair, since it is the poor who more often must live an d work in high crime areas.
While not all guns incorrectly attacked as "preferred by criminals" are popular for hunting, many are, but hunting is not the only valid purpose for owning a firearm. Small handguns, which may be ill-suited for hunting or long-range target shooting, are useful for personal protection, where the accuracy range rarely needs to exceed ten feet. Semi-automatic rifles and shotguns are suitable for hunting a variety of game. Semi-automatic, military and military-sty le rifles, including the M1 Garand, Springfield M1A, and the Colt Sporter, are used in thousands of sanctioned Highpower Tournaments each year and the National Matches at Camp Perry, Ohio. Hundreds of thousands of individuals use these rifles for recreati onal target shooting and plinking.
The Second Amendment clearly protects ownership of firearms which are useful "for the security of a free state" and semi-automatic versions of military arms are clearly appropriate for that purpose. It was the cle ar intention of the Framers of our Constitution that the citizenry possess arms equal or superior to those held by the government. That was viewed as the best deterrent to tyranny, and it has worked for over 200 years. It was also the intention of the Fou nding Fathers that citizens be able to protect themselves from criminals, and that doesn't necessarily require a gun suitable for hunting, target shooting, or plinking. All modern firearms may be used for such protective purposes.
people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm
So what are all you gun nuts going to do when some gun law changes are made which is 100% guaranteed ? Shoot someone?
Yup
Tony,
You bring no rational or pratical solutions to the problem. Until you do, people are always going to marginalize you. Bring something intelligent to the table of discussion or go away. Name calling in the lowest form of attention getting.