26 reported killed in Newtown [W:72/89]

Moot said:

But he didn't so you can stop speculating.

Click to expand...

Timothy McVeigh did, so you can stop blaiming the tool and find away to actually do something that works.

In '95, Holder called for anti-gun info campaign: 'Brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way' | WashingtonExaminer.com

Eric Holder 1995 Interview - Gun Control - "We Must Brainwash People Against Guns" - YouTube

“One thing that I think is clear with young people and with adults as well, is that we just have to be repetitive about this,” Holder told the Women’s National Democratic Club while discussing how to curb gun violence in D.C. “It’s not enough to simply have a catchy ad on a Monday and then only do it every Monday. We need to do this every day of the week and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”

Click to expand...

disneydude said:

Yes....but it would not be as easy to kill as many people at once. There would still be some killed, but it would not have been the same level as were killed due to the capability of this assault weapon.

Click to expand...

A shotgun would have killed just as many. The pistol would have killed just as many, in fact probably more due to the greater difficulty of operating a rifle in confined spaces.

disneydude said:

I agree. But there is nothing in the second Amendment that says that people have a right to every weapon available. The second Amendment only prohibits to government from an outright ban. Banning assault weapons does nothing to infringe on that right.

Click to expand...

You don't understand the Second Amendment.

In the simplest terms - the Second Amendment allows us to prevent tyranny.

If you read some history it would be more clear to you.

The Second Amendment isn't in place so the common man can protect himself from robbers - the Second Amendment is in place so we remain a free nation and that our Bill of Rights is protected.

Honestly, I could care less if people today believe they're safe from tyranny. I bet the Jews felt the same way in Germany circa 1935...... The notion that a government (even ours) is in capable of becoming hostile or fascist is ludicrous.

Unlike most people I do know history repeats itself and you're seeing it happen in front of your eyes.

disneydude said:

No moral or responsible person would ever own this type of weapon.

Click to expand...

That's just nonesense. What the weapon looks like is absolutely irrelevant. And in the US civilian market, that's all that "assault" means.

disneydude said:

The founders of our Constitution could not have possibly imagined this type of weapon when they wrote the Constitution. The Second Amendment does not prevent reasonable restrictions on guns. There is nothing in the second amendment that says that you cannot ban assault weapons.

Click to expand...

What they imagined is the need to protect one's self, possibly even from one's own govt. So, it makes perfect sense that the founders invisioned the populace armed with weapons capable of doing that.

The ones who want gun control are the bleeding hearts and those who want guns out of our hands just so they can rule in tyrannical fashion, so the common man cant stand up and say "no" like our forefathers did.

If people didn't have guns then what is to stop the government from having tanks roll down our streets? what good enlisted citizens who will refuse to drive those tanks because they believe in protecting liberties not destroying them or harming innocent civilians?

Our government is encroaching into authoritarian territory. These ****s believe that "a civil society is an obedient society."

These ****s are using this tragedy to steal your civil liberties - to guilt you into giving them up, all because some crazy fool killed his mom and stole her guns and in evil fashion killed a bunch of young kids.

What about those drummer boys who were 10 who beat those drums while they marched to battle? all so we could be free? no one cares about them because they've been gone so long.

Eighty Deuce said:

I have a child with Asperger's as well. Fortunately, with passive
manifestations. However, there are some afflicted who are prone to violent outbursts. Going by some of what I have read, this kid in CT seemed to have issues beyond such as well, being very reclusive. I do not see evidence that the Mother was overbearing either. Perhaps she was, but she had a child who apparently had numerous mental issues. What I see is that she tried several approaches. I do fault her for having guns available to a child with such disorders. As the kid planned the event, it was not a random outburst either. And she missed the signs.

Click to expand...

Well from what I hear he suffered from Anhidrosis, or CIPA where he cannot feel pain if injured and they think he was sociopathic. Thing is we've had to contend with the outburst from our son from time to time although none violent.

It hit close to home for us when the news started reporting his brothers assertion that he had Aspergers Syndrome. We've fielded a few questions from friends and family since Friday and people that actually know our son.

People that we thought were educated.

Aspy's typically don't respond well to change and experience higher than normal levels of anxiety when they're confronted with an accute alteration of their schedule.

Shake up their reptitious day and you have a kid who's profoundly anxious with out a clear way to express their selves verbally.

We've decided we can work with the social aspects and help guide him but refuse to call this a "disease". They can not identify any pathalogical cause or objective physiological issues that cause it and think its hereditary.

The shooter was clearly enraged at mother. Whether or not he was medicated reamains to be seen.

It's also interesting he took his life ( or any one elses ) for that matter.

disneydude said:

The founders of our Constitution could not have possibly imagined this type of weapon when they wrote the Constitution. The Second Amendment does not prevent reasonable restrictions on guns. There is nothing in the second amendment that says that you cannot ban assault weapons.

Click to expand...

On the contrary. The framers of the Constitution had exactly this type of weapon in mind when creating the second amendment.

The foremost purpose of the second amendment is to prevent the disarmament of civilians, keeping the federal government in check to prevent tyranny (such as was defeated during the Revolutionary War). Keep in mind that the arms being protected for private ownership were, at the time, the most devastating one-man deployable weapons in the entire world. The Constitution is for the most part a document outlining checks and balances on the federal government to ensure its power was not abused and that the will of the people stays the foremost governing power in the United States. The Second amendment is one such check and balance. To truly adhere to the intent of the Second Amendment, any military armament should should be available for private ownership. Very few 2nd Amendment supporters would go to that length however.

As an aside, we've seen our government readily take advantage of under-armed entities (Iraq) while remaining passive on those capable of defending themselves (North Korea) even though gross human rights violations could justify intervention. So I don't think defense from tyranny is an outlandish justification.

As for other justifiable uses, if the above is not enough, consider defense against dangerous wildlife. One example is packs of feral hogs that threaten much property and human safety. Semi-automatic rifles with high capacity magazines are a very effective tool to defend one's family and property against such pests. Likewise for bears, wolves, and other dangerous wildlife that unfortunately occasionally threaten human life.

Fenton said:

Well from what I hear he suffered from Anhidrosis, or CIPA where he cannot feel pain if injured and they think he was sociopathic. Thing is we've had to contend with the outburst from our son from time to time although none violent.

It hit close to home for us when the news started reporting his brothers assertion that he had Aspergers Syndrome. We've fielded a few questions from friends and family since Friday and people that actually know our son.

People that we thought were educated.

Aspy's typically don't respond well to change and experience higher than normal levels of anxiety when they're confronted with an accute alteration of their schedule.

Shake up their reptitious day and you have a kid who's profoundly anxious with out a clear way to express their selves verbally.

We've decided we can work with the social aspects and help guide him but refuse to call this a "disease". They can not identify any pathalogical cause or objective physiological issues that cause it and think its hereditary.

The shooter was clearly enraged at mother. Whether or not he was medicated reamains to be seen.

It's also interesting he took his life ( or any one elses ) for that matter.

Click to expand...

It's not that they don't feel pain, those who suffer from the disease don't feel fear, yes they're generally sociopathic and narcissistic (symptom).

They don't have emotions, they cant feel sympathy, empathy, guilt, joy etc.

Bill Tetley said:

When someone refuses to acknowledge the difference between a first trimester fetus with no self-awareness and a sweet, joyful 6 year old ... their pleas that they are the only ones who really care for children fall on deaf ears.

Click to expand...

The difference? Both could have children of their own one day if you don't kill them.

It's disgusting that you've convinced yourself that there's a difference.

mac said:

I'm all for denying gun ownership to those that have some legal indication that they are violent or a felon. Unfortunately with nut-jobs, there is no way of knowing they are a nut-job until they do something.

Click to expand...

If I applied for a loan of 5 grand would the bank just say "well can't tell if you are going to pay this back or not but here"?

They run extensive background checks on you for an APARTMENT, A DRIVERS LICENSE, A CHAUFFERS LICENCE, EVEN PEOPLE THAT HAVE FOOD STAMPS HAVE EXTENSIVE BACKGROUND CHECKS.

However buying a gun not so much. evidently or there would not be so many nut jobs with guns killing innocent people and kids.

Lets face it somebody screwed up on selling guns legally to nut jobs, and they keep screwing up.

Whatever system the selling of guns has to not sell to nut jobs isn't working, time for a change.eace

mac said:

Unless they've committed a crime, there's nothing to check.



As far as I know, the same background check and waiting times are required at gun shows as they are at dealers.

Click to expand...

So what , Americans are just supposed to wait around for another nut job with a gun to kill more innocent people just so the NRA and it's followers can make another speech about how this is being looked into.

Question; when did the shooter buy the guns at the pawn shop before the Virginia tech murders?
Question ;was the shooter from the Virginia Tech murders ever stopped by the police before the murders?

This was a cover up but 20 kids 6 yrs old is going to be a bit more difficult to cover up.eace

presluc said:

If I applied for a loan of 5 grand would the bank just say "well can't tell if you are going to pay this back or not but here"?

They run extensive background checks on you for an APARTMENT, A DRIVERS LICENSE, A CHAUFFERS LICENCE, EVEN PEOPLE THAT HAVE FOOD STAMPS HAVE EXTENSIVE BACKGROUND CHECKS.

However buying a gun not so much. evidently or there would not be so many nut jobs with guns killing innocent people and kids.

Lets face it somebody screwed up on selling guns legally to nut jobs, and they keep screwing up.

Whatever system the selling of guns has to not sell to nut jobs isn't working, time for a change.eace

Click to expand...

The kid did not buy any guns, He stole them from his Mother after he murdered her.

Fisher said:

My response is that a woman may have been beaten to death, who knows what would have happened to that child had the father not come in with a gun, and a businessman would have likely been pistol-whipped and robbed if not killed had they not had access to their guns. Differentiating between good owners and bad owners cannot be done if there are no owners which is what the left seems to want. The answer is not in taking away the guns but in weeding out the nutjobs--the other common denominator in this and VT.

Click to expand...

First of all check the post again I responded to your post .
Your response to my post is responding to your post???

How come everytime any American ask for better stronger gun control somebody always says some crap like "youre takin away ore guns" or "frum ma ded cold hands" or some **** like that.

You yourself said "weeding out the nut jobs" did you not?

In the current system of gun sales this apparently is not working. history has proven that.
So we ask for a different system to keep innocent people and kids from being shot and killed.
What do we get flyers from the NRA AND CATCH PHRASES FROM GUN OWNERS?????eace

Bronson said:

Obama's position on abortion is that the child should be tossed in a closet to starve to death if it accidently survives an abortion

Obama armed Drug Cartels in Mexico who used those weapons to kill innocent women and children in Mexico

Obama armed terrorists in Libya and Syria

Obama's "Gun Control" at the consulate in Benghazi left it defenseless as the terrorists stormed in with weapons he supplied them to murder our ambassador

You Collectivist Authoritarians on the Left are more pissed off at guns and the NRA then the murderer. His name was Adam Lanza. He was severely mentally ill. Blame him.

Obama killed “Readiness and Emergency Management” Funding for Schools

Obama Administration Killed “Readiness and Emergency Management” Funding for Schools

Democrats killed legislation that would have potentially seen the Adam Lanza was properly treated for his mental illness in CT

AN ACT CONCERNING THE CARE AND TREATMENT OF PERSONS WITH PSYCHIATRIC DISABILITIES.

Click to expand...

And here I thought this thread was about gun control, what you still campaigning election's over.eace

presluc said:

First of all check the post again I responded to your post .
Your response to my post is responding to your post???

How come everytime any American ask for better stronger gun control somebody always says some crap like "youre takin away ore guns" or "frum ma ded cold hands" or some **** like that.

You yourself said "weeding out the nut jobs" did you not?

In the current system of gun sales this apparently is not working. history has proven that.
So we ask for a different system to keep innocent people and kids from being shot and killed.
What do we get flyers from the NRA AND CATCH PHRASES FROM GUN OWNERS?????eace

Click to expand...

The current system of letting mentally ill people go to school and get SSI checks and roam the streets isn't working either. Guns have nothing to do with violent tendancies other than that some violent people use them. Taking away guns addresses nothing as to violence other than denying the non-violent the opportunity to defend themselves against the ones that we coddle in the name of protecting the rights of the mentally ill.

longview said:

The kid did not buy any guns, He stole them from his Mother after he murdered her.

Click to expand...

A 6 YEAR OLD IN FLINT MICHIGAN WAS SHOT IN THE FACE FROM A KID WHO STOLE HIS MOTHER'S BOYFRIEND'S GUN?
Your point?
I have many friends that own guns getting them and using them to kill others, even if they were dead would be most difficult.

I find it extremely odd that this killers mother had 3 guns in her name bought legally by her but could not protect herself from being killed and taking the 3 guns and ammo she had???eace

Mr.Nick said:

It's not that they don't feel pain, those who suffer from the disease don't
feel fear, yes they're generally sociopathic and narcissistic (symptom).

They don't have emotions, they cant feel sympathy, empathy, guilt, joy etc.

Click to expand...

That's interesting. Because this kid had to have an enourmous amount of rage and hatred for his mother.

Of course its all specation but a Autistic kid is more at peace when they're withdrawn.

Aspergergers kids isolate themselves, its we can do to get our son to be involved socially and pull him away from his interest if only for a short time.

presluc said:

A 6 YEAR OLD IN FLINT MICHIGAN WAS SHOT IN THE FACE FROM A KID WHO STOLE HIS MOTHER'S BOYFRIEND'S GUN?
Your point?
I have many friends that own guns getting them and using them to kill others, even if they were dead would be most difficult.

I find it extremely odd that this killers mother had 3 guns in her name bought legally by her but could not protect herself from being killed and taking the 3 guns and ammo she had???eace

Click to expand...

True, since clearly anyone with a gun is holding it and she therefore had a gun in both hands, she should have been able to. Maybe she had to set both down for an instant while doing dishes. So the lesson is learn how to do everything with one hand and duct tape one gun to one of your hands. :doh

Fisher said:

The current system of letting mentally ill
people go to school and get SSI checks and roam the streets isn't working either. Guns have nothing to do with violent tendancies other than that some violent people use them. Taking away guns addresses nothing as to violence other than denying the non-violent the opportunity to defend themselves against the ones that we coddle in the name of protecting the rights of the mentally ill.

Click to expand...

The mentally ill are hardly coddled in this Country as they make up a large portion of the homeless population.

You're talking about people who by no fault of their own have been forced to contend with a life of poverty and pain.

Fisher said:

The current system of letting mentally ill people go to school and get SSI checks and roam the streets isn't working either. Guns have nothing to do with violent tendancies other than that some violent people use them. Taking away guns addresses nothing as to violence other than denying the non-violent the opportunity to defend themselves against the ones that we coddle in the name of protecting the rights of the mentally ill.

Click to expand...

So you're saying in their current system that mentally ill people can buy a gun or have access to a gun legally and that's why we need guns?
To protect the average honest responsible people that buy guns from the mentally ill people that buy guns????

Am I missing something here????

I have two solutions to the current problemetic system of gun control's system.

1. Stronger and more deliberate background checks with heavy prison sentences with anybody that breaks it and if a gun sold winds up at a crime scene directly heavy fines and loss of right to sell guns.

2. NO BACKGROUND CHECKS ARM EVERY TEACHER EVER WORKER IN THE WORK PLACE EDOUBLE THE MALL AND STORE SECURITY WITH ARMED GUARDS, PAYED FOR BY THE NRA and it's FOllOWERS PLUS GUN TAX ON EACH WEAPON ,TEACHERS AND WORKERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT EXEMPT OF COURSE.. SINCE THEIR WEAPONS ARE SUPPLIED BY THE NRA.eace

presluc said:

A 6 YEAR OLD IN FLINT MICHIGAN WAS SHOT IN THE FACE FROM A KID WHO STOLE HIS MOTHER'S BOYFRIEND'S GUN?
Your point?
I have many friends that own guns getting them and using them to kill others, even if they were dead would be most difficult.

I find it extremely odd that this killers mother had 3 guns in her name bought legally by her but could not protect herself from being killed and taking the 3 guns and ammo she had???eace

Click to expand...

Your original comment,
"However buying a gun not so much. evidently or there would not be so many nut jobs with guns killing innocent people and kids."
made it sound like it is easy to buy a gun, and that was how this kid acquired the guns used.
He took them from his mother, I think it is safe to say, she did not give her permission to use her guns to kill herself, and attack the school.

Hairytic said:

When is the right time to talk about gun control? It's an honest question. Can you answer that? We have got to talk about it sometime, and it has to be before this happens again and again. How many innocent lives have to be lost before we start the conversation? I wish we had talked about it and acted before this happened. Maybe we can get it done before the next time sweet and innocent lives are lost.

Click to expand...

If by gun control you mean that teachers are allowed (even required?) to carry firearms and trained to control them....maybe.

Because short of having armed guards in every single classroom to prevent this kind of thing, that is the only thing that might do so.

Gun control sure as hell won't.

longview said:

Your original comment,
"However buying a gun not so much. evidently or there would not be so many nut jobs with guns killing innocent people and kids."
made it sound like it is easy to buy a gun, and that was how this kid acquired the guns used.
He took them from his mother, I think it is safe to say, she did not give her permission to use her guns to kill herself, and attack the school.

Click to expand...

So a woman buys 3 guns to protect herself gets killed and the guns she bought are used to kill 26 innocent people?

Gun owners should be responsible people , at least you will agree on that.

However, where is the responsibility ?
Colombine
Virginia Tech
Aurora
Conn
NEED I GO ON?

When I was in the army I was responsible for my weapon no body else just ME.
Nobody else used it no body else took care of it me.
I kept it clean used it when I had to and turned it in clean.

If gun owners think of a gun as a trophy that should not have one.
If gun owners do not respect the gun they buy then they should not have one.
If gun owners think that everybody will stay away from their gun just because they say so , then they should not have one.
If gun owners have no place to keep their gun from being used by others then they should not have one
If gun owners do not know how to treat a gun they should never be able to buy one.eace