“When I was in school they used to teach us to hide under the desk in case a bomb hit. Now they’re teaching children to hide in classroom closets from people with guns. Where are we headed with this senseless violence?” – Chester Kulis in Activists protest outside Zion gun store [at chicagotribune.com]
and Chester never learned that it was all foolish security theatre.
Doesnt seem like we’re headed anywhere given hiding under a desk protects against a nuke about as well as hiding in a room protects against an armed attacker.
Just a cabal of bureaucrats needing to look like their doing something without actually putting in the hard work to accomplish anything.
Two more morons who think “we need to do this” or “we need to do that,” but can’t come up with anything better than progressive talking points on guns. Move along…
I’d love to see them protest where, you know, murders actually happen, say Oak Park. That might be interesting.
Coupla old, frail white guys. I ‘d give them about 30 minutes in any area in Chicagoland that actually has a problem with violence.
Zion is safe? No it ain’t. But yeah these loser guys need to protest at the Chuck’s Gunshop weenie gathering. Riverdale is scary…
Haven’t been in Chicagoland in quite a while, but I ‘m pretty sure Zion still isn’t Englewood, Chicago Lawn, or Garfield Park (East Or West).
Actually hiding under a desk does provide a level of safety from a nuclear blast.
Assuming that you’re not immediately vaporized, the Second biggest threat from a nuclear attack is the blast wave and flying debris from it.
If you have time to duck and cover, you’re probably far enough away to avoid vaporization.
While I know now that a near miss with a nuke is 80% – 90% survivable with what they showed in duck and cover, You pretty much instantly dismiss it as bull when in high school when they tell you you can survive a direct hit with a city destroying bomb by hiding under a desk or in a doorway covered by a newspaper.
Guns are not equal to violence by themselves. I say reject idiotic naive ideas and reject these guys.
Nice to see this story getting hammered in the comments. Surprised they aren’t closed already.
I have often felt like going out on the sidewalk in front of our town hall carrying signs with things like ‘I Stand For Individual Liberty!’, ‘NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION’ and suchlike things.
But I have a job and don’t have time.
I reject your 9mm and raise you one Ak47!
I do denounce violence. It’s just that I recognize that, sometimes, it’s necessary to renounce other people’s violence with extreme prejudice.
Two citizens exercising their First Amendment rights. God Bless America. This is how the country is supposed to work. It is sad we have so many immigrants and children of immigrants who don’t understand basic American rights like the right to free speech and the right to keep and bear arms. Both are equally important.
I’m glad we live in a country where the first amendment guarantees the right of a pair of naive sentimentalists to urge renouncing violence and rejecting guns. If—after full consideration—people want to reject guns for themselves, OK for them.
Of course full consideration might bring them to: “Renounce aggression. Speak softly, carry a gun, know how to use it, when to use it, and when not to.”
I love how the Tribune will cover this. But IGOLD, what’s that?
Illinois Gun Owner Lobby Day
How can there be legal gun owners in Illinois? So is that the day that all the gun owners go to the state capital to turn themselves into the authorities.
“Renounce violence, cower in fear!”
It is Cleveland, after all, so there’s a decent chance they’ll be mugged or assaulted by the very thugs they’re defending.
The Brady bunch is out in full force today.
The only way to stop a bad country with a nuke is a good country with a nuke. Worked for the cold war, lets make it work with guns.
Wow. Can you pack anymore irony into a single sentence? Nope.
Ban those assault nukes and their 30 kiloton assault clips. sarc/
I have a better idea: Renounce violence, own guns if you feel like it.
Sorry man, but I refuse to ‘renounce violence.’ Violence itself is not the problem…criminal violence is the problem.
I think I know what you mean, but there’s a lot of GOOD things that come from “violence.” One example I’ve used before is a parent physically grabbing their child as the child begins to run into traffic.
That act is technically “violence,” but it serves a laudable goal…saving the life of one so innocent as to, through no fault of their own, not recognize the dangers and control their own behavior.
We really need to take control back of the language. “Violence” exists all around us in the world we live in. We could no more “renounce” it than we could will our bodies to no longer require oxygen.
The progressive control freaks among us love to deflect attention and focus from “reality” and try to force our tunnel vision down so tight as to believe in their fantasies. There will be no end to “violence.” Let’s at least be grown-up to recognize this simple reality and figure out ways to live in the world as it is.
Apparently we’re headed to the closet. That’s where.
Unless of course we are able to act in our own defense against monsters. Like for example if school staff and parents and other adults on campus were allowed to legally carry and have the capability to stop an atrocity before it even starts.
In that case we’re going to a news interview.
Comments are closed.