Gotta get down to it.
Soldiers are gunning us down.
Should have been done long ago.
What if you knew her and
Found her dead on the ground?
How can you run when you know?
Monday, May 04, 2009
This Day in History: May 4
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Wow. 40 years ago todayGood call David...
My initial reaction, although a guess, was correct. I recall my (very right wing reactionary) father commenting at the time that the riots would stop after this. He was right.
Further proof that "a well regulated militia" refers to the National Guard, making the right to keep and bear arms a collective right and thereby protecting the citizenry from gun violence.
Like your website, Paul!
With the trend toward using the military domestically for law enforcement, history will repeat itself. With a few significant differences.
Being clear: I like your website, Paul. Clever, scathing.
Have to disagree here, David. I cannot see why you honor this day and this incident, especially with a "song" from communist sympathizers. I know you are 10 years my senior, and you should know that the agitation of students to participate in protesting the Vietnam War had a trail that led directly back to Moscow. There should have been some more astute folk at Kent State (on both sides) than what was there that day.
While the response of the Governor was improper and led to the shootings, it is not surprising that National Guard soldiers would respond in the manner they did. They had no particular orders to follow and no higher authority to directly control them. The results were and are predictable, even today.
This is precisely why soldiers should NEVER be used as "law enforcement." That is not the function of a soldier. Soldiers are trained to respond with deadly force, not with restraint. For a soldier, the most common resolution to a problem in any given conflict is destruction of the opposition — regardless of who and what that opposition is.
This historically has been, and remains the duty of a soldier — from ancient times until today.
Davis, Paul W., SSgt. USAF/ANG Ret.
Because the government murdered unarmed children, Paul.
Codrea, David N., B.S. KSU
Um, 39 yrs ago, I was in Cambodia at the time, remember it real clear in the Stars and Stripes. May 4, 1970. Not seared, not really. People have asked me what the hardest thing was over there, and I tell 'em it was the way my own govt. treated me.
David,
I hardly consider 18+ year olds, children. At 18 I was in uniform, voluntarily. Even better, at 16 Audie Murphy enlisted in the Army and was in combat at 18. Those over 18 years old are NOT children.
Moreover, rock throwers are not unarmed. Regardless of the fact that the individuals shot were not throwing rocks, students they were around and in close proximity to, were involved in throwing rocks. Rocks are a weapon, and they can be, and are used to kill people.
There was enough provocation and lack of discipline on both sides to see where this whole incident was headed. If you are dumb enough to believe that you can continually provoke a man with a rifle, and not get shot, I have zero sympathy for you when you get shot. As far as I am concerned, the students lacked common sense and unnecessarily aggravated the situation. There were other ways of making the point about the invasion of Cambodia.
However, I am well aware that restraint and a lack of sacrificial victims doesn't make very good propaganda, so the point had to be pushed.
Neither am I letting the authorities off the hook. As I stated previously, soldiers are NOT law enforcement, and should never be used as such. The Governor's decision to use National Guard forces was unwise at best, and a decision that played directly into the hands of leftist agitators.
This brings me to the point of the "government" shooting individuals at Kent State. I must disagree here as well. Blaming the "government" for the irresponsible actions of certain individuals, is convenient, but also irresponsible and lacking in discernment.
If the Governor, the Mayor, the Ohio House and Senate, or members of the Judiciary had ORDERED the shooting, then you can legitimately say the "government" did it. However, I have witnessed, and had personal knowledge of individuals who acted without orders and violated the law and regulations while in uniform, and then tried to claim they were acting in their "official" capacity. It happens, and it happens all too frequently.
I just don't think you have thought this one through enough David.
Paul, I have thought this through for 39 years.
David,
Then you need to bring some other evidence to the table than is already out there.
The evidence simply does not support the accusation that "the government murdered unarmed children."
The evidence does support a finding of ZERO common sense used by all parties involved.
Everyone involved that day was an adult, and should have acted as such. All I see, from all accounts, are a bunch adults acting as overgrown children, letting their emotions get in the way of proper judgment — ON ALL SIDES.
The outcome was not surprising.
Gasoline + matches + irresponsible child = fire
Post a Comment