Abortion pix vs Bullet-ridden 6 year olds of Newtown

[Pryderi]

Should the media or pro-gun control advocates show the devastation of AR-15's on children to get the point across?

[Ed Suspicious]

1. No sir. I wouldn't like that. n/t

[MadHound]

2. I think that none of the above is the best choice.

It's not right when the anti-abortion side does it, and it would be right if the gun control folks exploited corpses for their own political agenda.

[Cynicus Emeritus]

3. No!

Should the media or anti war activists have the right go publish the devastation of our foolish neocon wars on individual servicemen/woman or anti-DUI activists publish photos of accident victims?

Respect goes far beyond agendas.

[morningfog]

7. Hmmmm. Howdy, welcome.

[Union Scribe]

4. No, they shouldn't.

Just show their smiling, living faces. That's more haunting, imo. Our "journalists" don't need more encouragement to be the ghouls they are.

[dsc]

5. absolutely

Emmit Till's parents, thank God, were willing to show the country just what happened to him, and because of that, the Civil Rights movement was propelled forward. I think the one and only shot we have of forcing change on the issue of guns is showing those pictures. Nothing else will work. If I were the editor of the Washington Post, I would have on the front page, above the fold, a picture of a different victim every single day until gun control was passed by this Congress and signed into law by this President.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

6. No. They're actual children with families who should never see something like that abused.

Think about that for a moment. See, it's a horrible idea to do something that abusive to the families of those victims.

[BlueJazz]

8. That one would be up to all the victim's families and even then...it would be in poor taste.

[Kalidurga]

9. No

It is traumatic enough knowing what happened and that their bodies were mutilated by bullets. It wasn't like what you see in movies where there is a little hole and some blood, they were shot up to the point where some I heard weren't readily recognizable.

Someone said it best. Show pictures of what they looked like before they were brutally murdered.

[Control-Z]

10. Which one of the families do you think would want to see,

let alone share, a photograph like that of their mutilated child? Think about it. Or do you believe the coroner's files should be open to the public?

Take it from someone who has lived with just what you are talking about. The beautiful woman in my signline is my mother. But people don't know her by that pic - smiling and alive. They know her for the one that was published - of her dead body - without permission from anyone in our family.

So, no. A big fat NO!!

And please, don't for a minute believe the abortion pictures you see are real. They are mostly fakes.

[flvegan]

11. This post begs a mention of PETA.

[Downwinder]

12. Could you just substitute a dog or cat shot four times with a 223?

Everybody would get the picture.

[Zoeisright]

13. I think that might be the only way to get some people

to see what their love of guns does. With the family's permission, of course. Closing your eyes to the horror of what your actions accomplish is childish.