Gonna see, trouble with the law, an OWS'r, pot use with psychotic break, and mommy did not want to get her little social justice douche institutionalized because he was "just misunderstood"....
Ah, Thomas, apart from your usual factually inaccurate version of facts, you have a uniquely ugly view of your alternate truths. So long as you inhabit the right wing fact-averse reality free alternate universe, I don't think you can appropriately point any fingers about psychotic breaks. Pot calling kettle black.
My observation of this douchebag gunning down his family in NJ driving across state lines, murdering his mother and 18 children and six or seven others, is not evidence of some sort of psychotic break on his part?
All of your conclusions are in question, as are your facts.
The shooter was mis-identified to begin with; there may or may not be a second shooter, so we don't know - yet - who shot whom, how or why.
Beyond that, the guns were all bought and registered to the mom, which is distinctly odd. It doesn't look like mom was actually into guns, so that makes the purchase distinctly unusual to say the least. Straw purchase? Something else?
Once again, we don't know what happened, and we sure as hell don't know.
Lets wait to see what the tox report from the autopsy says before we jump to conclusions about pot use, much less a psychotic break.
Studies have shown that while we do have shooters like Jared Loughner and James Holmes, and the guy at the Mpls. signage company, the majority of people who go in for these kinds of shootings are most often not crazy, they're just mad as hell and want to take it out on someone.
Btw, there is no evidence that there was any problem requiring the younger son should be institutionalized, or had any mental illness either. So your crack about 'mommy' and 'social justice' is unwarranted.
Time for a ban on all assault style weapons, spare parts, expanded magazines, background checks on all sales, and make the submission to the NICS data base mandatory for all states.
And if you're all that worried about crazy people shooting victims, how about we start mental health testing gun owners? Works for me.
People who knew him were not mental health professionals capable of diagnosing anything, much less is that information from which you can conclude Adam should have been institutionalized.
MAYBE Mom should have locked up her guns? How about no one, sane or insane, could have shot anybody WITHOUT those guns to exist at all? How about neither Mom nor Son could have killed anyone if we didn't have so many guns in the U.S.?
Mental health testing might or might not have helped here, but it certainly would have helped in the cases of Jared Loughner, Ian Stawicki, Benjamen Barnes, James Holmes, the several James Holmes copycats who were stopped with arsenals, and it could go a long ways towards preventing the high number of gun suicides and gun murders by people who are not in their right mind.
As of this evening, when I turned off the radio I was listening to, law enforcement was still not confirming the identity of the shooter. They weren't confirming a lot of things yet, so I'm willing to wait to see what comes out after forensics are done.
Adam Lanza clearly had INTELLECTUAL difficulties, he had a low IQ, whatever other problems he might have had. New Jersey is over-run with weapons, so please don't give me the bullshit that they are gun unfriendly.
We don't know how Nancy Lanza stored her guns, we don't know how Adam Lanza got them - he may have held a knife to her throat. We do know that if she didn't have them in the first place we wouldn't be having this discussion. We DO NOT know that Adama Lanza is definitely the killer or the ONLY killer. There is nothing about either Asperger Syndrome or autism that requires institutionalizing people. And we don't know what contribution if anything pot had to do with this, as you claimed earlier.
So when we have facts, not a lot of reporters passing on heresay as fact, we can have this discussion. But until then Thomas, you have a pattern of getting a lot of your facts wrong, and then running in unjustified ideologically driven wrong directions with them.
People are dead; the incident is over; we can wait for the facts, and we can draw better informed and more rigorously logical conclusions than the hateful nonsense you spew.
One thing however IS clear - more guns equal more gun crimes and more gun deaths and wounding, and gun control does work. Compare gun friendly states with the ones that have successful regulation, the latter have far fewer than the former. And of those they do have, the crimes are mostly from guns acquired originally in gun friendly states.
Responding to the question of standing up to the NRA, it should be noted that getting the NRA endorsement and support did not help in the last election ... consider this analysis : This election cycle presents another opportunity to evaluate the reality vs. the myth of the NRA’s influence. In independent expenditures through November 4, the NRA spent $11.8 million to defeat President Obama and $3.4 million across six key Senate races to defeat Senator Sherrod Brown in Ohio, Senator Bill Nelson in Florida, Tim Kaine in Virginia, Senator Claire McCaskill in Missouri, Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin, and Chris Murphy in Connecticut. In fact, the NRA, through November 4, spent 88% of its federal independent expenditures in these 7 races.
The result? The NRA’s candidates lost in the presidential race and 6 key Senate races.
If the NRA’s money does not influence election outcomes, then the question becomes why do candidates fear them and continue to evade their responsibility to protect the American people from the preventable tragedy of gun violence?
That stated, the influence of the NRA may not impact elections but instead it is their ability to control the debate in Congress. IMO, after the Gifford incident, Congress could have done something ... but the only piece of legislation that was approved was by the House and that was to expand gun rights (inserting federal law over state law) with the passage of the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011. (Note that Tammy Balwin voted against the legislation yet was elected to the Senate while the bills chief sponsor Cliff Sterns will not be serving next session.) Further, Gloria Negrete Mcleod unseated Congressman Joe Baca in California's 35th Congressional District when Baca's strong support of the NRA was used as a campaign issue. Baca is a Democrat. The NRA endorses Democrats and Republicans ... thus this not a pure party issue ... its a candidate issue.
While I read the statements from Speaker Boehner and Chairman Kline (responsible for Education issues), their answer was "just pray". Conversely, the words of Representative Carolyn McCarthy have merit : “Leaders in Washington from both parties, and groups like the NRA, all say that now is not the time to talk about how gun safety laws can save lives in America. I agree, now is not the time to talk about gun laws – the time for that conversation was long before all those kids in Connecticut died today.
“We owe it to our children to work harder to reduce gun violence. The Second Amendment is the law of the land but it was never intended to allow murderers to take the lives of innocent kids. It’s our moral obligation as policymakers and as parents to do more to save lives.
“I hope the President’s words about taking ‘meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this regardless of the politics’ stay true as we continue down this road again.”
While the tragedy at Sandy Hook gets the headlines, haven't we ignored the daily gun-murder rate of 32 people ? It happens every day ... or could happen ... especially as our society seems to accept the gun culture more and more ... as illustrated by a shooting by Stanley Wilkinson, a pastor at the Rochester Seventh-Day Adventist Church, who opted to "shoot first" fearing an intruder who happened to be his granddaughter that he forgot had been living with the family for the past two months.
The problem is that the NRA uses tactics other than legal contributions to push their endorsement. They use ALEC to push legislation through corrupt conservatives; they use other means to engage in illegal and unreported lobbying. And they are excellent at finding the key ways to sneak in provisions to legislation they can use - an example would be making the NICS data base voluntary/optional while requiring the FFLs to do that background check. Useless if you don't have the names in the data base in the first place. They have succeeded in keeping the ATF too small and underfunded, making policing of the FFLs etc. virtually impossible, and any effective enforcement of much of the legislation moot.
We need to undertake revamping of our gun culture, recognizing the failure that it is.
Conservatives are like horses that run back into burning barns because it is the place to which they retreat when they are frightened even when it is the worst possible choice, because they react out of habit and emotion.
When conservatives feel threatened, or uncomfortable with change or with anything different from themselves (or their perceptions of them), they seek weapons to feel empowered and to feel they can coerce conformity.
That their policies, including this one, only result in problems becoming worse matters to them about as much as the barn being on fire matters to the horses. So the NRA has a built in base to manipulate and exploit for gun sales.
IMO, the NRA, ALEC, etc. have solicited their type of candidates for elective office ... in my House District, "Gun-totting" Tony Cornish went unchallenged in the 2012 elections ... my district was not the only district that did not have a challenger for an incumbent. The last time that Cornish had a serious challenger was in 2008 and his challenger was extremely upset that he did not get a better rating from the NRA. On the Senate side, Republican incumbent Julie Rosen had a challenger after not having one in 2010 ... I doubt that the NRA would have been upset if Rosen lost since the challenger campaign signs were "orange" with a target scope on the back. For that matter, Tim Walz has used radio commercials to tout his NRA endorsement.
For some hunting is a way of life, but that is not the question ... the question should be : What type of assault weapon should be used to defend yourself from your granddaughter that is coming home ?
Politicians are not stupid ... they respond to lobbyists (heck, why is Al Franken calling the funding mechanism for the Affordable Care Act "job-killing" ? The answer is that the lobbyists have won.) Sure, Collin Peterson has been known to hold a fundraiser where the lobbyists will attend, but those are pretty private events whereas John Kline and Erik Paulsen are considered prizes as hunting partners ... thus they are appealing for votes.
My point is that politicians "believe" that speaking out against assault weapons will hurt them politically ... I don't think it will ... Will Senator Klobuchar (who does not have to face re-election for six years speak up .... well, based on her Facebook posting, the answer is appears to be no The news of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School is simply heartbreaking. As a mother, I cannot fathom the grief of the parents who lost their children today. My thoughts and prayers are with all the children, teachers, their families and loved ones on this tragic day. Now, let us remember that Klobuchar defeated the NRA-endorsed Mark Kennedy, who the gun lobby spent more than $160,000 in her first election and beat "A"-rated Kurt Bills this year while she earned a "F"-rating from the NRA. If Amy Klobuchar won't speak up, who will ... it's too easy to blame the NRA and ALEC ... its time to pressure the politicians to take speak up ... heck, I would rather have Tony Cornish campaign on lowering school security costs while protecting students on a simple piece of legislation : Principals must be licensed and carry a firearm at school events. Once, that is passed, then he can move on to requiring school bus drivers to carry assault weapons.
Gonna see, trouble with the law, an OWS'r, pot use with psychotic break, and mommy did not want to get her little social justice douche institutionalized because he was "just misunderstood"....
ReplyDeleteAh, Thomas, apart from your usual factually inaccurate version of facts, you have a uniquely ugly view of your alternate truths. So long as you inhabit the right wing fact-averse reality free alternate universe, I don't think you can appropriately point any fingers about psychotic breaks. Pot calling kettle black.
DeleteMy observation of this douchebag gunning down his family in NJ driving across state lines, murdering his mother and 18 children and six or seven others, is not evidence of some sort of psychotic break on his part?
ReplyDeleteAll of your conclusions are in question, as are your facts.
DeleteThe shooter was mis-identified to begin with; there may or may not be a second shooter, so we don't know - yet - who shot whom, how or why.
Beyond that, the guns were all bought and registered to the mom, which is distinctly odd. It doesn't look like mom was actually into guns, so that makes the purchase distinctly unusual to say the least. Straw purchase? Something else?
Once again, we don't know what happened, and we sure as hell don't know.
Lets wait to see what the tox report from the autopsy says before we jump to conclusions about pot use, much less a psychotic break.
Studies have shown that while we do have shooters like Jared Loughner and James Holmes, and the guy at the Mpls. signage company, the majority of people who go in for these kinds of shootings are most often not crazy, they're just mad as hell and want to take it out on someone.
http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/07/20/12858757-mass-murderers-often-not-mentally-ill-but-seeking-revenge-experts-say?lite
Btw, there is no evidence that there was any problem requiring the younger son should be institutionalized, or had any mental illness either. So your crack about 'mommy' and 'social justice' is unwarranted.
DeleteTime for a ban on all assault style weapons, spare parts, expanded magazines, background checks on all sales, and make the submission to the NICS data base mandatory for all states.
And if you're all that worried about crazy people shooting victims, how about we start mental health testing gun owners? Works for me.
Maybe mom should have locked up her guns, and all this in the (g)unfriendly state of NJ, and now she made the parents of 20 children pay the price.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.examiner.com/article/ct-school-shooting-shooter-adam-lanza-killed-mom-nancy-with-her-guns
People who knew Adam Lanza told reporters that he had mental problems. They say he suffered from autism or possibly Asperger Syndrome.
Sure sounds like mother is high up on the list of people to blame for this tragedy, not keeping her firearms secured properly....
And mental health testing would not have helped here..... since they were stolen weapons and improperly secured....
People who knew him were not mental health professionals capable of diagnosing anything, much less is that information from which you can conclude Adam should have been institutionalized.
DeleteMAYBE Mom should have locked up her guns? How about no one, sane or insane, could have shot anybody WITHOUT those guns to exist at all? How about neither Mom nor Son could have killed anyone if we didn't have so many guns in the U.S.?
Mental health testing might or might not have helped here, but it certainly would have helped in the cases of Jared Loughner, Ian Stawicki, Benjamen Barnes, James Holmes, the several James Holmes copycats who were stopped with arsenals, and it could go a long ways towards preventing the high number of gun suicides and gun murders by people who are not in their right mind.
As of this evening, when I turned off the radio I was listening to, law enforcement was still not confirming the identity of the shooter. They weren't confirming a lot of things yet, so I'm willing to wait to see what comes out after forensics are done.
Adam Lanza clearly had INTELLECTUAL difficulties, he had a low IQ, whatever other problems he might have had. New Jersey is over-run with weapons, so please don't give me the bullshit that they are gun unfriendly.
We don't know how Nancy Lanza stored her guns, we don't know how Adam Lanza got them - he may have held a knife to her throat. We do know that if she didn't have them in the first place we wouldn't be having this discussion. We DO NOT know that Adama Lanza is definitely the killer or the ONLY killer. There is nothing about either Asperger Syndrome or autism that requires institutionalizing people. And we don't know what contribution if anything pot had to do with this, as you claimed earlier.
So when we have facts, not a lot of reporters passing on heresay as fact, we can have this discussion. But until then Thomas, you have a pattern of getting a lot of your facts wrong, and then running in unjustified ideologically driven wrong directions with them.
People are dead; the incident is over; we can wait for the facts, and we can draw better informed and more rigorously logical conclusions than the hateful nonsense you spew.
One thing however IS clear - more guns equal more gun crimes and more gun deaths and wounding, and gun control does work. Compare gun friendly states with the ones that have successful regulation, the latter have far fewer than the former. And of those they do have, the crimes are mostly from guns acquired originally in gun friendly states.
Responding to the question of standing up to the NRA, it should be noted that getting the NRA endorsement and support did not help in the last election ... consider this analysis :
ReplyDeleteThis election cycle presents another opportunity to evaluate the reality vs. the myth of the NRA’s influence.
In independent expenditures through November 4, the NRA spent $11.8 million to defeat President Obama and $3.4 million across six key Senate races to defeat Senator Sherrod Brown in Ohio, Senator Bill Nelson in Florida, Tim Kaine in Virginia, Senator Claire McCaskill in Missouri, Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin, and Chris Murphy in Connecticut. In fact, the NRA, through November 4, spent 88% of its federal independent expenditures in these 7 races.
The result? The NRA’s candidates lost in the presidential race and 6 key Senate races.
If the NRA’s money does not influence election outcomes, then the question becomes why do candidates fear them and continue to evade their responsibility to protect the American people from the preventable tragedy of gun violence?
That stated, the influence of the NRA may not impact elections but instead it is their ability to control the debate in Congress. IMO, after the Gifford incident, Congress could have done something ... but the only piece of legislation that was approved was by the House and that was to expand gun rights (inserting federal law over state law) with the passage of the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011. (Note that Tammy Balwin voted against the legislation yet was elected to the Senate while the bills chief sponsor Cliff Sterns will not be serving next session.)
Further, Gloria Negrete Mcleod unseated Congressman Joe Baca in California's 35th Congressional District when Baca's strong support of the NRA was used as a campaign issue. Baca is a Democrat.
The NRA endorses Democrats and Republicans ... thus this not a pure party issue ... its a candidate issue.
While I read the statements from Speaker Boehner and Chairman Kline (responsible for Education issues), their answer was "just pray".
Conversely, the words of Representative Carolyn McCarthy have merit : “Leaders in Washington from both parties, and groups like the NRA, all say that now is not the time to talk about how gun safety laws can save lives in America. I agree, now is not the time to talk about gun laws – the time for that conversation was long before all those kids in Connecticut died today.
“We owe it to our children to work harder to reduce gun violence. The Second Amendment is the law of the land but it was never intended to allow murderers to take the lives of innocent kids. It’s our moral obligation as policymakers and as parents to do more to save lives.
“I hope the President’s words about taking ‘meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this regardless of the politics’ stay true as we continue down this road again.”
While the tragedy at Sandy Hook gets the headlines, haven't we ignored the daily gun-murder rate of 32 people ?
It happens every day ... or could happen ... especially as our society seems to accept the gun culture more and more ... as illustrated by a shooting by Stanley Wilkinson, a pastor at the Rochester Seventh-Day Adventist Church, who opted to "shoot first" fearing an intruder who happened to be his granddaughter that he forgot had been living with the family for the past two months.
The problem is that the NRA uses tactics other than legal contributions to push their endorsement. They use ALEC to push legislation through corrupt conservatives; they use other means to engage in illegal and unreported lobbying. And they are excellent at finding the key ways to sneak in provisions to legislation they can use - an example would be making the NICS data base voluntary/optional while requiring the FFLs to do that background check. Useless if you don't have the names in the data base in the first place. They have succeeded in keeping the ATF too small and underfunded, making policing of the FFLs etc. virtually impossible, and any effective enforcement of much of the legislation moot.
ReplyDeleteWe need to undertake revamping of our gun culture, recognizing the failure that it is.
Conservatives are like horses that run back into burning barns because it is the place to which they retreat when they are frightened even when it is the worst possible choice, because they react out of habit and emotion.
When conservatives feel threatened, or uncomfortable with change or with anything different from themselves (or their perceptions of them), they seek weapons to feel empowered and to feel they can coerce conformity.
That their policies, including this one, only result in problems becoming worse matters to them about as much as the barn being on fire matters to the horses. So the NRA has a built in base to manipulate and exploit for gun sales.
IMO, the NRA, ALEC, etc. have solicited their type of candidates for elective office ... in my House District, "Gun-totting" Tony Cornish went unchallenged in the 2012 elections ... my district was not the only district that did not have a challenger for an incumbent. The last time that Cornish had a serious challenger was in 2008 and his challenger was extremely upset that he did not get a better rating from the NRA. On the Senate side, Republican incumbent Julie Rosen had a challenger after not having one in 2010 ... I doubt that the NRA would have been upset if Rosen lost since the challenger campaign signs were "orange" with a target scope on the back. For that matter, Tim Walz has used radio commercials to tout his NRA endorsement.
DeleteFor some hunting is a way of life, but that is not the question ... the question should be : What type of assault weapon should be used to defend yourself from your granddaughter that is coming home ?
Politicians are not stupid ... they respond to lobbyists (heck, why is Al Franken calling the funding mechanism for the Affordable Care Act "job-killing" ? The answer is that the lobbyists have won.) Sure, Collin Peterson has been known to hold a fundraiser where the lobbyists will attend, but those are pretty private events whereas John Kline and Erik Paulsen are considered prizes as hunting partners ... thus they are appealing for votes.
My point is that politicians "believe" that speaking out against assault weapons will hurt them politically ... I don't think it will ...
Will Senator Klobuchar (who does not have to face re-election for six years speak up .... well, based on her Facebook posting, the answer is appears to be no
The news of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School is simply heartbreaking. As a mother, I cannot fathom the grief of the parents who lost their children today. My thoughts and prayers are with all the children, teachers, their families and loved ones on this tragic day.
Now, let us remember that Klobuchar defeated the NRA-endorsed Mark Kennedy, who the gun lobby spent more than $160,000 in her first election and beat "A"-rated Kurt Bills this year while she earned a "F"-rating from the NRA.
If Amy Klobuchar won't speak up, who will ... it's too easy to blame the NRA and ALEC ... its time to pressure the politicians to take speak up ... heck, I would rather have Tony Cornish campaign on lowering school security costs while protecting students on a simple piece of legislation : Principals must be licensed and carry a firearm at school events. Once, that is passed, then he can move on to requiring school bus drivers to carry assault weapons.