Skip to main content

View Diary: Pro-Gun Activists Heckle Newtown Dad (32 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Would you pause (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Verbalpaintball

    to consider the vulnerability of a parent sitting beside a photo of his dead kid, or is your drive to register your political point so strong that it overrides compassion? Extreme dispassion in the face of such testimony is discordant, anti-social even.

    Again I don't mean to be insensitive, but as a person who recently took time away to reconcile a personal loss, don't you have any appreciation of what this man may be going through? You'd still use the opportunity to foist your ideology, simply because he invoked the use of a rhetorical question to make a point?

    •  Do we have different definitions for rhetorical? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gerrilea, oldpunk

      It sounds like he wanted an answer to me. If it was rhetorical, I would not answer.

      Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

      by KVoimakas on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 07:57:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The context shows it to be rhetorical (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        43north

        He was not opening the floor to public comment. He's behind a mike, the sole interrogate. He's making remarks in answer to an invitation to testify. As the parent of a murder victim. And he's seated next to a picture of his recently murdered kid. His family has paid the price for current gun policy, it's not an abstraction. That boy is never coming home again. You are presumably not a parent, which is certainly not a requirement to formulate an opinion. But most people would accord this man the courtesy of not using the opportunity to call attention to themselves.

        The public are invited to audit, they are not being asked to render comment themselves, that is the nature of a public hearing. It's just disrespectful. Especially to a survivor of a tragic loss. That's my final thought on the subject.
        .

        •  rec'd with a slight disagreement (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gerrilea, oldpunk
          The public are invited to audit, they are not being asked to render comment themselves, that is the nature of a public hearing. It's just disrespectful. Especially to a survivor of a tragic loss.
          Gallery comments are never welcome, be it a legislative session or hearing, court testimony, or public debate on a referendum.

          Those who comment from the gallery at a public hearing, are often escorted from the room, or given an opportunity to be put on the list of speakers or witnesses.
          In Court, obviously this does not apply, and your disruption will find you in both Contempt and custody.

          Where I disagree.  Each citizen has a tragic loss of some form.
          It's the nature of life.  I've a friend who lost a child younger than the children of Sandy Hook Elementary School to cerebral meningitis.  Suzanne's a grieving parent.

          Should she be on the list of witnesses, due to shared parental grief?
          Is not her child's sudden and tragic death equal to that of a Sandy Hook parent?

          Grief and tragic loss, doesn't give special dispensation to a witness.  Compassion however is due, and I believe The Chair was correct, morally and ethically.

          Contrary opinions belong on the list of witnesses, not as heckles from the gallery.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (128)
  • Community (64)
  • Elections (24)
  • Environment (23)
  • Media (23)
  • Culture (22)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Science (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Law (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Labor (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Ireland (16)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Hillary Clinton (15)
  • Rescued (15)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site