In addition, a young child was shot and killed
I hate how whenever a kid gets caught up in something like that it's always harped on about to the exclusion, or near exclusion, of everyone else involved. The only reason the congresswoman is being mentioned at all is
because she's a congresswoman, while everyone else is practically ignored in favor of talking about how tragic some kid getting killed is. As though society having invested significantly less resources feeding, educating, and otherwise supporting the individual somehow makes them more important than those who've had decades of training, socialization, and support. In addition, children are produced as a generally
unwanted consequence of recreation, and there are
literally more of them than are wanted. An adult is generally far more valuable than a child in terms of their benefiting society, and their loss is significantly greater, due to all that society has invested in them over the years. Trying to paint the child's death as the
real tragedy is either a case of a foolish kneejerk reaction, bullshit sensationalist journalism, or just paying lipservice to the fact that everyone else is doing it, so that one doesn't stand out as "cold" or somesuch.
What makes a
federal judge less important than a child who has yet to finish their first
half-decade of schooling?
we'd be more likely to ... change our way of life, and do whatever it takes just to make sure this doesn't happen again.
In this case, I believe all that's being asked is that
certain public figures
shut the fuck up with their violent revolutionary rhetoric, something which has been said for so long people have given up trying to convince them not to be such giant fuckwads, and this happens to demonstrate exactly what happens if someone were to actually listen to, and enact, their bullshit calls to arms, whether or not this particular nutjob was one of the ones in their pocket or not.If we spend more resources to prevent ... long term weather ... we could overall save more lives and prevent more damage.
How do you suggest we prevent weather? Nuke the sky?
If we spend more resources to prevent ... violence in Sudan, we could overall save more lives and prevent more damage.
Except Sudan is 100% irrelevant to anything anyone in the US gives a damn about, and so none of our concern. We have neither the desire not the responsibility to intervene, wasting our resources and looking even more like global meddlers. The lives of people who do not effect us in any way aren't worth nearly as much as the lives of the soldiers that would be required to intervene, and so intervening would bring exactly no benefits to anyone but people who are irrelevant to the world as a whole.