The Arizona Shootings: Three More Reader Responses

One of the highlights of the reading week for me is the pleasant banter in the New York Times between political moderates, David Brooks (Right) and Gail Collins (Left). Here, they gave their take on The Arizona Shootings with Does Moderation Work? and I've selected threee more reader responses for your perusal.

N.B.: These comments aren't actually about moderation in Politics but they are interesting points in the Arizona shootings debate:

"Two truths: 


It is true that we will never completely outlaw guns in this country. 


And it is true that recreation and self protection with firearms do not require owning a gun that can shoot 30 bullets without reloading. 


Can we finally get the moderate solution and ban assault weapons? 


David, are to advocate, moderately or even passionately, for that?"

"Why it is that when Islamic terrorists commit acts of violence, the explanation is always sought in their socio-cultural and religious environment? 

But, when acts of violence like the one in Arizona happen, we are always reluctant to look for socio-cultural explanations and instead look for individual motivations. 

Already, the mainstream view has emerged that this was a singular, one-off, lone act by a mentally-disturbed individual. It's almost as if people are afraid to find out whether this might be linked to something larger in our culture. It's more comforting to know that the perpetrator was just a crazy person."

"One thing that's missing from the entire debate is any admission of responsibility. Other than Loughner's parents, I have not seen a single person accept any blame. It's actually a healthy thing to examine your actions, see if you might have contributed to a bad thing that has happened and then apologize. It clears the air and makes others feel better and makes you look more mature. 

Would it kill Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin to do so?"