Breaking News - Shooting at Newtown, Connecticut elementary school.

reply to post by Tecumte


Are we being nudged (as in Nudge Theory methods) to accept gun control incrementally?? One little baby step at a time....nudge by nudge....till one day we wake up and we're all disarmed.

reply to post by Mully

But they haven't! Even when there was an assault weapons ban, Harris and Klebold used perfectly legal weapons.

Take off that tight-fitting cop hat and let your brain breathe just a bit.

You have any proof that a mass murderer can not buy and use a banned weapon?

Or don't you get the point?

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Mully

 

Harris and Klebold bought an arsenal through the gun show loophole.

Hyperbole much?

3 of the 4 guns in the 'arsenal' were purchased by an 18 woman for them, a felony, not a loophole.
For all of the cop law and order BS.... She was never charged. Why not?

Did the seller know who the guns were for? No.

The seller legally sold Robyn Anderson the two shotguns and a rifle.

reply to post by queenofswords


I don't think it is a take your guns as much as take your large capacity clips and the number of clips a person can have for each gun. That would get rid of the mass casualty problem from these shootings. Some one reloading a clip with bullets is not shooting a hundred bullets in a short amount of time.

Originally posted by Wewillallbefree
There was not one single tear to be seen, totally phony!

Originally posted by undo
well i'm not an advocate of gun control,
and i'm not a democrat, but i don't think obama was faking the tears.

#ing vampires.


What's next? He had a big breakfast therefore he's a soul-less psychopathic killer?
God you people really hate this guy!

reply to post by Mully


Who then illegally transferred them to someone else...... Making them illegal weapons. Weapons stolen from legit owners are also illegal weapons. Violent felons are not allowed to have guns, they get them anyways. Making it harder for everyone else does not remedy that.

Originally posted by MisterMaster
Ok, I took some time to search out some definitive information regarding how these children were shot...if possible.

Stories on msm sites seem all over the board but there seems to be a consistancy forming right before my very eyes. Follow me here...

We know 20 children were shot in an "area of two rooms". All dead with multiple gunshot wounds...some as many as 7. In close quarters like that its probably pretty easy to hit people, but you arent getting 1/1 killshots.

With some kids being hit many times...according to multiple sources including the ME, ALL were hit at least twice. That suggests to me that they were executed with one to the head. It is also a narrative many outlets are running with. Not execution per se, but saying the shooter made sure they were dead by headshots.

Then it finally clicked for me as to why I really feel "off" about this...and I am a very open minded individual.

This crime is just TOO macabre. Its too much. I can think of one time...one, in which someone executed little kids. Think it happened in some European country and some guy massacred them in a gym. Besides that...I have never heard of such a thing.

Was Aurora terrible...hell yes, but way different. I feel its way way easier to shoot randomly into a crowd and run away. Its nowhere near as personal and up close. In fact, almost all mass shootings have that trait in common, not this one though.

This kid perhaps EXECUTED like....little girls dressed in dresses and carrying a Barbie for crisake. I say it is just not possible for anyone...no matter what mental state they are in...to execute 20 six year olds without some serious mind control or drugs.

Its weird to say that one of my issues is that its TOO barbaric and unprecedented, but I can't help but entertain the thought.

Thoughts? Should I close the laptop for the day lol?

edit on 15-12-2012 by MisterMaster because: cuz apparently I cant spell

You're thinking what soooo many others of us are thinking, (but may not want to openly say) this sounds like one dm cruel motivated agenda, We'll see. God help us if these bstds have resorted to this type of barbarism.

Originally posted by DelMarvel

Originally posted by PaperbackWriter

I've been digging your input on this thread.
Yes indeed the official story, that is subject to change, isn't it.
The media and LE have both been actively changing it.
Or not and some staying with the old info.
This ensures that no one has a clear idea what is going on.
If it's not a conspiracy, it's a darn good imitation of it.

And once again you have a chaotic scene crawling with hundreds of people all over the place. Reporters from all over the country, local police, state police, FBI, ATF, the state medical examiners office and all his assistants and who knows who else. What is so mysterious about false information being reported, especially with the pressure of a rabid media?

Did rabid reporters rush them to release the names of victims before this evening?
So why did they rush as you call it to put out information that they knew was false
and would have to backtrack on?
I am not one to believe that this is done in error.
But, carefully crafted misinfo on purpose.
Because they could have chosen not to.
Nobody is forcing these anonymous unnamed sources from leaking this stuff out to the media.

And how did they handle it today? From a printed fact sheet they gave to all reporters at the same
time. That could have been done for every bit of info all along, could it not?

Originally posted by MisterMaster
Ok, I took some time to search out some definitive information regarding how these children were shot...if possible.

Stories on msm sites seem all over the board but there seems to be a consistancy forming right before my very eyes. Follow me here...

We know 20 children were shot in an "area of two rooms". All dead with multiple gunshot wounds...some as many as 7. In close quarters like that its probably pretty easy to hit people, but you arent getting 1/1 killshots.

With some kids being hit many times...according to multiple sources including the ME, ALL were hit at least twice. That suggests to me that they were executed with one to the head. It is also a narrative many outlets are running with. Not execution per se, but saying the shooter made sure they were dead by headshots.

Then it finally clicked for me as to why I really feel "off" about this...and I am a very open minded individual.

This crime is just TOO macabre. Its too much. I can think of one time...one, in which someone executed little kids. Think it happened in some European country and some guy massacred them in a gym. Besides that...I have never heard of such a thing.

Was Aurora terrible...hell yes, but way different. I feel its way way easier to shoot randomly into a crowd and run away. Its nowhere near as personal and up close. In fact, almost all mass shootings have that trait in common, not this one though.

This kid perhaps EXECUTED like....little girls dressed in dresses and carrying a Barbie for crisake. I say it is just not possible for anyone...no matter what mental state they are in...to execute 20 six year olds without some serious mind control or drugs.

Its weird to say that one of my issues is that its TOO barbaric and unprecedented, but I can't help but entertain the thought.

Thoughts? Should I close the laptop for the day lol?

edit on 15-12-2012 by MisterMaster because: cuz apparently I cant spell

stalin starved some 30,000,000 Ukrainians to death in their own houses. that included small children and babies, teens, adults, old people, men women children gays straight various religious bents. just starved enmasse. took about 12 months total to starve the entire "country" of Ukraine.

pol pot killed children if they looked defective, or his estimation of defective. he also killed men, women, gays, straight, various religious bents.

hitler killed children if they were certain types of jews, gypsies, gays, handicap or certain forms of christianity (he killed protestants and kept the catholics).

i think there are plenty of examples. i don't consider their examples to be exempt from consideration because, unless they are aliens or reptilians or something, they are humans and part of the public like the rest of us. so their mass murders also count.

reply to post by Mully

The seller legally sold Robyn Anderson the two shotguns and a rifle.

You are obfuscating.
I never said the seller committed a crime.

Robyn Anderson did commit a crime by knowingly buying them for an underage person.

That is why I specifically asked why she wasn't charged, Mr. Law and Order. You must have skipped over that part of my post, right?

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Mully

 

But they haven't! Even when there was an assault weapons ban, Harris and Klebold used perfectly legal weapons.

Take off that tight-fitting cop hat and let your brain breathe just a bit.

You have any proof that a mass murderer can not buy and use a banned weapon?

Or don't you get the point?

First of all I'm not a cop so stop with the anti-establishment bs.

I'm in the process of becoming one and I have a long ways to go to wear the cap.

I, Mully, could buy a banned weapon right now. If I went to Bulgaria and I had the means, I could even buy a nuclear device! Who the hell cares? Your logic does not make any sense at all.

As a government you try to be as utilitarian as possible. There are always going to be exceptions to the law and it's the police, government, and citizen's job to ensure that those exceptions are few and far between.

Do you feel it's necessary to allow citizens the right to have over 100 rounds of ammunition in their gun as if it were a hopper on a paintball gun?

I'm going to go download it make sure it doesn't dissapear

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Wewillallbefree

 

There is even video footage of them pulling it out. Or at least there was, could be scrubbed now that the story changed again.....

reply to post by delusion


i defended him. you must have read that incorrectly.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Mully

 

The seller legally sold Robyn Anderson the two shotguns and a rifle.

You are obfuscating.
I never said the seller committed a crime.

Robyn Anderson did commit a crime by knowingly buying them for an underage person.

That is why I specifically asked why she wasn't charged, Mr. Law and Order. You must have skipped over that part of my post, right?

They didn't charge her because she admitted to the crime and testified in front of the House Judiciary Committee. Did she get away Scott-Free? Yes. But technically she legally went through the necessary steps needed to purchase a gun.

She even stated that if there was a background check, she would have felt too uncomfortable to purchase the guns for the two mass murderers. According to most reports, they were trying to purchase an M60 machine gun. I'm sure if it were legal, they would have found a way to buy it. Fortunately we had laws against the sale of general purpose machine guns, just like we should have laws limiting magazine size, conceal-ability, and fire visibility in place like we did in 1999.

reply to post by Mully

Do you feel it's necessary to allow citizens the right to have over 100 rounds of ammunition in their gun as if it were a hopper on a paintball gun?

Yes.
Personally I don't care for any mags that hold more than 30 rounds. But that doesn't mean that I have to act like a wannabe cop and stomp all over the rights of law abiding citizens.

First of all I'm not a cop so stop with the anti-establishment bs.

Oh my mistake. I read a post where someone was bragging about being a Nassau County cop.
Sound familiar?

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by delusion

 

i defended him. you must have read that incorrectly.

pardon me if it wasn't clear, it was not in response to you but the post that quoted yours.

reply to post by Mully

They didn't charge her because she admitted to the crime

Sounds like law enforcement to me, oh we didn't charge her, she admitted to supplying the weapons to mass murderers.

No wonder we are in the shape we're in.

Piers Morgan interviewed one of Lanza's classmate last nite and she mention in the interview that the mom was a kindergarten teacher, this is interesting needless to say as initial reports mention she was a teacher then she is not but a person who would know if she was a teacher would be her as she was a neighbor and former classmate of Lanza's...

She mention's this around the 2 minute mark...

Have at it!!!



youtu.be...

Originally posted by delusion

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by delusion

 

i defended him. you must have read that incorrectly.

pardon me if it wasn't clear, it was not in response to you but the post that quoted yours.

yeah i don't think he's the antichrist. he seemed genuinely upset, cause he has kids and loves his children. he was reacting like a parent would. i feel bad for all the white and chocolate people on this planet. we are being played like human fiddles.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Mully

 

Do you feel it's necessary to allow citizens the right to have over 100 rounds of ammunition in their gun as if it were a hopper on a paintball gun?

Yes.
Personally I don't care for any mags that hold more than 30 rounds. But that doesn't mean that I have to act like a wannabe cop and stomp all over the rights of law abiding citizens.

First of all I'm not a cop so stop with the anti-establishment bs.

Oh my mistake. I read a post where someone was bragging about being a Nassau County cop.
Sound familiar?

edit on 15-12-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

I said I was a hopeful Nassau County cop.

Your first point is absurd. Gun nuts just being gun nuts. Statistics don't lie though. When Australia administered a gun buy-back program in 1996 they saw a large decline suicides and a small decline in homicides. Limiting guns equals less crazies with them.