Why Do We Only Care Sometimes?

You need to make a first comment in order for your article to be noticed in the comment window on the Front Page.  This will do the trick.  As for an answer to the question asked by your article, other issues such as respect or hatred for Trump, arguments about religion and gun worship take precedence among the NT membership.

Forgot about Sandy Hook already?  I wonder how many 'military grade' weapons were delivered into America's hands since that day.

And the statement about "More people dying from drug overdoses than in The Vietnam War" is absolutely false.  In total, a little over FIVE MILLION people perished in that war.  Untold numbers were maimed.  I arrived 'in-country' in late 1967.  One thing that continues to haunt me to this day was the number of children, young people and old people that were missing limbs and bearing the scars of war.

Yes.  Why do we only care sometimes?

Well, Elaine didn't mention other shootings either, not sure why you're focused on that one and neglect the disco rampage, etc., etc. Turnabout being fair play and all.

It is true that things like illegals committing crimes and the volume of drugs coming over the border are 'Old News' and not near as exciting as our daily does of 'Trump did _______ today' stories that are rampant here iand on many news outlets. 

We continue to ignore the threat of North Korea, except when we get the breathless pause of some horses ass saying oh, Trump is going to cause World War III with North Korea (by doing what his predeccessors have done, though he has offered talks with N.K.).  Seems we only care (at least about half of us) about what we are told to care about, which gets translated here, daily.

To begin with, it is a false meme that liberals do not care about some murders. A young lady was shot and killed by an insane undocumented man. It was a tragedy and though he will never see the light of day again he should not have been here. This tragic set of circumstances became a cause celeb among the far right owing to the killer being undocumented. Still none of this is a, well, a trump card which overcomes the fact she was killed by a gun, an illegal gun. It was bad. It should not have happened. Nobody is excusing what happened. The fact is though we learn of so many individual and mass shootings so damn often some pf the multitudinous gun mayhem going they do not get the attention others do. This old liberal would like to care deeply about all of them but there are just too damn many to keep up. In any case, nothing could be further than the truth than that liberals or the State of California care more about some senseless deaths by firearms than others. Every one of them are senseless... 

Liberals care about liberals

Care to back that up or are you merely indulging in base hyperbolic alt-right rhetoric? Your comment above is just a lazy minded RW meme not unlike the hyperbolic far rigtht wing meme that liberals did not care when that young lady in California was shot and killed or about other murders...

an insane undocumented man.

The gun was illegal, but the shooter, who had been deported several times, wasn't? But it was OK for him to return because this is a sanctuary city. Using the sympathetic term "undocumented" tells us all we need to know. The only liberals care about is being in power and exploiting tragedies like this.

Liberals care about liberals

True.

Unlike Conservatives-- all of whmo have a lot of compassion and care for everyone-- regardless of political views!

(Why do you think that is-- could it be that all conservatives are born genetically superior? Curious minds want to know!)

Worked for over 15 years as a paramedic. Senseless deaths happen on a daily basis. It's only when folk are killed en-masse and high profile do the living seem to pay any attention. We humans have short attention spans and most will have forgotten about this school shooting, like we've forgotten about all the others, in a few months.

It was a tragedy and though he will never see the light of day again

Not true.  He was found innocent in San Francisco.  He's probably out of the country now.  In all fairness, the bullet ricocheted off the concrete wall before striking Kathryn Steinle per NBC who wrote an article about her death, but only talked about Trump's tweets almost the entire article.  We're use to it.  We know those who love the country and those who don't.  And don't get me wrong.  I know you love the country, but when a major news source writes an article about an illegal alien accidentally shooting an innocent American citizen and almost the entire article is about Trump's tweets, it's very telling to some of us.

We humans have short attention spans and most will have forgotten about this school shooting, like we've forgotten about all the others, in a few months.

Now that is the most honest comment I have read in a long time. 

liberals only "care" when someone's death can be exploited for a liberal political purpose---the deaths of the parkland students are "cared about" bec ause it plays in nicely to their goal of gun confiscation and therefor control...if there is nothing in it for dems or for them to get more in control of people, they simply don't care..

the steinle murder did nothing for dems agenda of control of others--if anything it damaged it by shining light on the illegals coming into the country and the crimes they commit while here--dems don't like that, illegals are all hard working, tax paying, validictorians who are after all future dem voters....so no they wouldn't and don't care about kate steinle--she and others like her are only in the way of the dem party..

Until we accept the fact we live in a very sick society, understand how we arrived here and what it is going to take from us to cure it, nothing is going to change for the better.  There's going to be more shootings like this, not only in the schools but many other places as well.  There's going to be lawlessness and disrespect for the life of others and even our own lives.

So this officer is a coward.  I would say he showed cowardice in this situation, although I don't know every detail about this,  I would say everyone is looking for someone to put the blame on.  If we are to charge him, why not charge all the others who played a part in this tragedy?  There were many.

The objective is to 'Protect the Children'.  That is the primary objective.  Will screaming about banning AR15's or other guns immediately solve our problem?  No, it will not.  The objective is to 'Protect the Children NOW!!!'.  Not when all the AR15s are removed from our society.

We can not continue to go about our lives and not put a great deal of attention on solving the problems we have in this country.  They are not going to solve themselves.  Without intervention, they are only going to become worse.

I don't like the idea of having security guards throughout our schools, but I have to accept the reality of the situation.  The world is not what I would like it to be, but I have to accept that and face it for what it is and take it on from that reality.

And we need to start caring all the time.

Elaine I would like to address this from an independent's view.

The death toll of our children in mass killings in school has become way to common place. There is an entire generation that has seen it happen over and over.. with Florida being the latest one. Eventually, these kids were going to come of age, and start to take on this issue. It is only natural. And we should care all the time.

While  Kate Steinle's death is a tragedy, it is a singular event. Every day people die at the hands of some criminal. Would her death had been anymore sad, if her murder was not an illegal alien? Do we cry for all those murdered daily?

Chicago's violence is a crime. Baltimore is actually worse per capita.  I don't understand why they don't beef up their police force. We in NYC, used to have this, but we invested in the safety of our city. We are one of the safest cities in America, and that is quite something considering that we are also the largest. All those cities are run by democrats.. so what is the difference? The people of NY put in people who would do something about the crime. The people have to care... parties are indifferent. There are loads of republican cities with high crime rates.. why don't they care? The answer is they don't have to since they get reelected. 

People are outraged by drunk driving. That is why we have MADD. But drunk driving is a state by state issue. Not every state wants to go hard core on drunk driving so drunk drivers get off with a slap on the hand in many states. Citizens in states that this is the case, should make their voices heard, and vote in people who will change their state laws. 

People are outraged by opioid epidemic. Parents have protested to get narcan for home use. The FDA, big pharm and doctors are the reason for this. The fact that drugs come across the border is terrible, but there would be a much smaller market if our doctors and big pharm didn't make junkies out of our citizens, which then provided a marketplace for Mexican gangs. Let's start from the beginning and work our way forward.

It is thought approximately 200 people are killed every year in America by the violent gang called MS-13, most members of the group are in America illegally. Four parents of children killed by these gangs were honored by President Trump at the State of the Union Address. The majority of people in the room stood, faced and clapped to honor those parents - except for the democrats. They did not stand, or clap or honor those parents. Why don’t democrats care about the victims of M13? Why?

This is political posturing. It was the dems commentary more on who was giving the speech, then the content. I don't agree with it, but I also don't think that it meant they didn't care. I wish everything wasn't politicized but that is the world we live in. 

I’ve ignored all the ‘calls for action’ by liberals on social media over the Florida school shooting - because their outrage is fake.

Now who is being political? It is not fake outrage, since it happened to them. It's been happening now for years. People are finally sick of it. When something happens to you, your outrage is never fake. I know. I am a 9/11 survivor. You should have seen my outrage when they tried to build that mosque. I knew what it represented and that was never going to happen. I was there at the protests. All I can say Elaine is be glad your child wasn't there. Ask Jonathan if his outrage is fake. His wife was there. Maybe you should read his article here:

Mourning, Grief & Comfort: Inside The Storm

We in NYC, used to have this, but we invested in the safety of our city. We are one of the safest cities in America, and that is quite something considering that we are also the largest.

NYC gets HUGE amounts of Federal money to combat terrorism and has for decades. Yes WE have invested in the safety of NYC. 

Secondly, NYC and NY state gun laws are pretty parallel. NOT so in Chicago vs. IL.

Thirdly, NYC isn't a 20 minute drive away from a source with easy access to a plethora of weapons [IN]. 

Try taking your LEGALLY carried New York State handgun into New York City and explain it to the cop as he cuffs you for illegally possessing a weapon.

Your need to truncate my comment invalidates your comment. 

NYC gets HUGE amounts of Federal money to combat terrorism and has for decades. Yes WE have invested in the safety of NYC.

Your comment may be true-- but its also misleading (implying that its somehow unfair that NYC gets more anti-terrorism money than , say, Des Moines or St. Louis. Or even larger cities such as Philadelphia or Chicago.).

I would phrase it differently: 

American cities that are mostly likely to be targets of terrorism get HUGE amounts of Federal money to combat terrorism and has for decades. Yes WE have invested in the safety of partsopf America that are the most likely terrorist targets..

It was no accident that they targeted NYC & Washington on 9/11. Why? It was symbolic-- both were seen as the main centers of American power (Washington the center of U.S. gov't power, NY the center of U.S. financial power. i.e. Wall St.). Anti-terror experts know that while there may be terror attacks anywhere, NY & D.C. are much, much, more likely to be terror targets.

(implying that its somehow unfair that NYC gets more anti-terrorism money than , say, Des Moines or St. Louis. Or even larger cities such as Philadelphia or Chicago.).

Actually, I wasn't implying any such thing.

My comment was merely to point out that NYC RESIDENTS aren't the ONLY ones who have 'invested' in making NYC such a safe city. When a city can count on Federal dollars to fund basic security, including Federal grants for cameras and communications, it can concentrate it's funds and forces on drilling down in neighborhoods and hot spots. That cities forces also have the advantage of partnering with the Feds in training and investigation methods. NYC has had that advantage since after the 1993 attack. I do not begrudge them that advantage, I have beloved family members who live there. 

Dulay,

I am talking about cops. Not the army or the national guard. They are only in our public areas like Penn station, or the airports. We pay for our cops. Those are the people who keep down the day to day crime. That is who we invested in. 

I am talking about cops.

As was I. 

There are loads of republican cities with high crime rates.. why don't they care? The answer is they don't have to since they get reelected.

I would like to address the comment above from my unbiased non partisan independent point of view as well.  I can think of many Democrat led cities that have been Democrat led cities for as long as I can remember who have very high violent crime rates and they continue to elect the same Democrat leadership year after year, decade after decade.  I found this article and although it is written by The Libertarian Republic, it derives its information from Neighborhood Scout who get their information from the number of violent crimes reported to the FBI per city.  There's a list of the top 100 crime-ridden cities with populations of 25,000 or more in this article.

Notes: The Libertarian Republic is a free market news, culture, and opinion magazine featuring the writing of prominent libertarians, conservatives, independents and sometimes democrats. The goal of TLR is to inform and educate citizens on important news stories from a perspective of economic freedom and personal liberty. Libertarian Republic has a right-center economic bias and is factually sourced. (8/19/2016) Update (1/6/2017)

mediabiasfactcheck

From Article:

“Our research reveals the 100 most dangerous cities in America with 25,000 or more people, based on the number of violent crimes per 1,000 residents. Violent crimes include murder, rape, armed robbery, and aggravated assault. Data used for this research are 1) the number of violent crimes reported to the FBI to have occurred in each city, and 2) the population of each city.”

16 out of the 20 cities with the highest violent crime rates have Democratic mayors. Two are Republican, and the other two are Independents. It is notable that one of the Republican controlled cities, Atlantic City, had previously been managed by wave after wave of Democratic mayors.

Neighborhood Scout asserts that high violent crime rates are probably less about the size of the populations than it is the economic issues in the communities, which would make a strong case for Democratic policies being to blame for the high crime rates. Big government policies impoverishing communities would naturally lead to greater crime, as citizens resort to illegal activity when they are disallowed the freedom to trade in the marketplace. Higher minimum wage laws put people out of work, driving up unemployment, and giving incentives to people to break the law.

Here’s the list of the top most dangerous cities

Six, talk about taking something I said out of context. Let's revisit what I wrote and take it from there:

Chicago's violence is a crime. Baltimore is actually worse per capita.  I don't understand why they don't beef up their police force. We in NYC, used to have this, but we invested in the safety of our city. We are one of the safest cities in America, and that is quite something considering that we are also the largest. All those cities are run by democrats.. so what is the difference? The people of NY put in people who would do something about the crime. The people have to care... parties are indifferent. There are loads of republican cities with high crime rates.. why don't they care? The answer is they don't have to since they get reelected. 

Notice that I point out 2 democratic cities first.. then went on to say that BOTH parties have cities that stink. But you focus in one one sentence taken out of context, so it looks like I am going after republicans and miss my point totally, which is, that once a party is in, no matter which party it is, they will not care if they get reelected. You then proceed to find a source (libertarian, which is hardly democrat friendly) to blame the dems for the most violent cities. But when I go and look at a totally unbiased source (neighborhood scout which is a real estate source and with the current 2018 stats), for cities of over 25,000 here is the list that the came up with:

neighborhoodscout

And guess what, they are pretty well split down the middle, which was my point. The party that is in, has little incentive to change anything. But you went and made it all who was the bad party and misrepresented what I actually said, and I resent that. It is dishonest in a discussion.

Their “outrage” is selective, and false, fake and phony

As is the entire content of your seed. 

and those who only care sometimes are a total disgrace.

You ask why aren't 'WE' marching and protesting. Where have you chosen to do so? What was the cause that motivated you to take to the streets and when did it happen?

Oh and what is your march/protest schedule for today. tomorrow, next week? Or don't you care about everything ALL of the time? 

Elaine,

We always care, about all of the events that you have mentioned. Anyone with a beating heart cares, and feels awful about senseless death. And as we move from event to event, we develop a way of reacting to it. All, except for the one that affects us directly.

The difference, based upon what I have seen, is the level and quality of reaction. All of the events you mention have been addressed, and varying degrees of effort, from grass roots to government legislation have been implemented. I could be wrong, but I think that the disparity in effort and success is what picking at you.

I'm going to make a prediction, which I base on personal feeling, and a deep familiarity with my hometown of 24 years, Parkland, Florida. There's going to be a march in Washington DC at the end of next month. I believe that there will be more than a million people there, many of them high school students from around the country. I believe that great pressure will be applied to our government to effect change in the existing gun laws. It will be an historical event in our country, as I believe this will be the first time in our country's history that law will be changed as the result of pressure coming from a group of Americans that are too young to vote.

This effort is being spearheaded by the students of MSD High School. Parkland is a small, upscale enclave in the northwest corner of Broward county. The children have been well educated, and if you have watched any coverage involving the kids, you will note that they are articulate, intelligent and well informed on the topic that they speak about. I can unconditionally guarantee you that they will not give up their mission any time soon. No one "picked" this school to be the latest victim, but no one ever bargained for the type of pressure that will be applied to the government to effect meaningful change in our laws.

It will be an historical event in our country, as I believe this will be the first time in our country's history that law will be changed as the result of pressure coming from a group of Americans that are too young to vote.

I really hope that's the outcome.

I'm going to make a prediction, which I base on personal feeling, and a deep familiarity with my hometown of 24 years, Parkland, Florida. There's going to be a march in Washington DC at the end of next month. I believe that there will be more than a million people there, many of them high school students from around the country. I believe that great pressure will be applied to our government to effect change in the existing gun laws. It will be an historical event in our country, as I believe this will be the first time in our country's history that law will be changed as the result of pressure coming from a group of Americans that are too young to vote.

I think you're right. 

There's definitely been a major shift occurring-- and its been happening surprisingly rapidly. There hasn't been anything like this after the numerous previous school massacres. (There was a lot of outrage after Sandy Hook-- but it died down fairly quickly).

So what's the difference this time? Its that much younger people have become involved in going beyond totally ineffective "feel good" actions such as merely posting comments online and have become to take real action!

The children are our future....

So what's the difference this time? Its that much younger people have become involved in going beyond totally ineffective "feel good" actions such as merely posting comments online and have become to take   real   action!

The children are our future....

Something that I have been trying to hammer home. We the over 55+ crowd are aging out. Unpleasant to think about, but all you have to do is look at who the advertising world is courting and while every group has 10 year spans, 55+ is one group, since they know we are the smaller market share... in everything. 

False equivalencies all over.

However, a point was inadvertently made: the proliferation of guns has seen an increase of gun deaths rather than a decrease.

I submit that the proliferation of people might play a part.

Ergo, "guns don't kill people; people kill people?"

However, a point was inadvertently made: the proliferation of guns has seen an increase of gun deaths rather than a decrease.

And example of how easily the public can be deceived, propagandized and led to be brain washed.  Not saying you any more than myself or anyone else doesn't suffer from the same fallacious beliefs, Unchained.

This information is from the FBI.  Number of gun murders has actually decreased from 2010 through 2014.  You know how the government is, always running behind, but from many articles you can look up for yourself, unless they are of a strong agenda to make you believe otherwise, gun sales are lower today than they have been in a number of years.  Also in 2014 you were 5 times more likely to be killed by a knife than a rifle. Gun murders were lower in 2014 than they were any year from 2010 through 2014.

ucr.fbi

I'm not trying to criticize you.  I'm as guilty as anyone.  I'm trying to find facts and if we still have a little faith in the FBI, then these statistics are supposedly the facts.

It appears that you fell victim to your own point.

You linked the UCR for murder between 2010-2014. Here's the UCR for murder between 2012-2016.

ucr.fbi

Make sure to compare the "Total Firearms" trend between your outdated source and my more contemporary source. 

At this time guns may play a part in our problems, but guns are not the reason for our problems.  We have a sick society. 

Today:

The American System of Government

Many terms describe the United States government. First of all, it is a democracy. This means the people rule. It is also a representative government. The people elect leaders who will represent their viewpoint when making government decisions. It is also a republic. This means that the chief of state (the president) is elected by the people. This is unlike a monarchy, where the throne is inherited through a family dynasty. The United States government is also a constitutional government. It operates according to a set of laws and principles that are outlined in a constitution. And finally, it is an example of the federal system of government. This means that the national government shares responsibilities with the state and municipal governments.

Allowing for this division of powers in the Constitution was purely an American invention. Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution specifically lists the duties of the national government. These are called delegated powers. The Constitution also gives the states authority in certain matters. These are called residual powers. Duties shared by both the state governments and the national government are called concurrent powers.

scholastic

Who knows what tomorrow will bring.  We can pass all kinds of laws that limit gun access, but that is not going to rid us of our problems.  Until the people of this country begin to feel a love of this country and start to center their attention on how fortunate they are to be Americans and are motivated to be responsible, we are doomed to continue this perilous path into our future.  This country's citizenry are being manipulated to center their attention on our past mistakes as a country.  Some are buying into this twisted movement, while others are resisting it.  When this happens, people become sad or angry and there is no future to look forward to for anyone.  This is a breakdown I personally don't know if we can overcome at this point.  About the only thing I can think of that would make a difference is if we were being attacked by a force that we all recognized , then maybe we would feel a little more united.

Some are buying into this twisted movement, while others are resisting it.

Please define the movement that you are referring to as twisted. 

Which side cares about the slaughter of Yemenis by Saudis?

Which side cares about the genocide in Malaysia?

Which side cares about the killing of innocent people by police?

Which side cares about American apartheid? (Hint: We call them reservations.)

Which side cares about American trained forces in Honduras being active participants in government repression?

Which side cares about the abuse of children in state sponsored foster homes?