64
   

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

 
 
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 01:11 pm
@firefly,


You are missing the point.

There are countless laws that are designed to prevent this kind of attack and the evil one ignored all of them.

If only some of the teachers had been allowed to exercise their constitutional right
to bear arms and defend themselves the evil ones actions would have been mitigated.
Ragman
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 01:13 pm
@ossobuco,
Agreed.
And many thanks, Osso.

I appreciate that link. Having skimmed it, I'm now reading the article in depth. I wondered to myself whether or not that was another key piece of the dynamics missing from the understanding of what was happened with the multiple difficult issues of him living at home since he turned 18.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 01:18 pm
@H2O MAN,

Jake Tapper Challenges Obama On Addressing Gun Violence: ‘Where’ve You Been?’

“It seems to a lot of observers that you made the political calculation in 2008,
in your first term, and in 2012 not to talk about gun violence,” Tapper said.
“This is not the first incidence of horrific gun violence of your four years.
Where’ve you been?”


BTW, Honey Boo Boo picked Obama
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 01:24 pm
@H2O MAN,


There have been four instances of horrific gun violence under Obama's presidential watch.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 01:57 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5199859)
Frank Apisa wrote:
I have cited several untrue statements you have made...


Nope. You cited true statements from me and then made baseless claims that they were untrue.



Frank Apisa wrote:
...and all you do is to say they are true without any proof.


That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.

You asserted that my statements were hyperbole without offering a shred of evidence to back up your charge.

I was right to dismiss your accusations in a like manner.


And I've offered proof of my claims over and over again. I don't remember if any of the times were in reply to you, but I've left proof all throughout this thread. Very likely some of the posts where I offered proof were the same posts that you are pretending are not true.

Here it is again: Since there are no legitimate reasons for banning harmless cosmetic features like a pistol grip and a flash suppressor, doing so would violate Rational Basis Review (and the courts might even apply a sterner standard of scrutiny).

So there is your proof that the Democrats are trying to violate the Constitution.



Frank Apisa wrote:
I do not dislike the truth...


You seem to have a curious objection to me telling the truth.



Frank Apisa wrote:
the truth is that you do not stick to the truth very much.


Says the guy who can't show a single untrue statement on my part.



Frank Apisa wrote:
I can point out the untruths...and you can counter that by actually proving that the statement is true.

But you don't. When I cite an untruth...all you do is to insist it is true.

Entertaining...but not particularly intellectual.


"Making a baseless claim that the truth isn't real" hardly counts as "citing an untruth". If you'd like to have people respond with actual proof, you might want to try making a more credible challenge to their statements.

And just in case you missed it above: Since there are no legitimate reasons for banning harmless cosmetic features like a pistol grip and a flash suppressor, doing so would violate Rational Basis Review (and the courts might even apply a sterner standard of scrutiny).

So there is your proof that the Democrats are trying to violate the Constitution. Twice in the same post now.



Frank Apisa wrote:
I have absolutely no desire to discount the Constitution...that is another of your distortions.


Wrong. You have responded to evidence that the Democrats are plotting to violate the Constitution, by making false claims that they were only trying to change the Constitution.

Covering for people who are trying to violate the Constitution is quite dismissive of it.



Frank Apisa wrote:
I, like many people, feel it is a useful document, but that it can be changed when change is warranted. In fact, the Constitution itself suggests it can be changed when change is warranted. If you are going to insist it cannot be...then perhaps you are being dismissive of the Constitution.


You are free to try to change the Constitution if you like.

But that does not justify you making false statements that the Democrats are trying to change the Constitution, when the reality is that the Democrats are trying to violate the Constitution.



Frank Apisa wrote:
Nope...but the nonsense you are spewing DOES!


The truth is not nonsense. No matter how inconvenient it is, it remains the truth.



Frank Apisa wrote:
Tsk, tsk...you did say you ALWAYS stick to the truth.


Yes. Your request that I stop telling the truth, is denied.



Frank Apisa wrote:
But you do not.


Says the guy who can't show a single untrue statement on my part.



Frank Apisa wrote:
And to suggest that I am requesting that you stop telling the truth is another distortion.


No, you've repeatedly and vigorously objected to my telling the truth, and now and then you even try to get me to stop.



Frank Apisa wrote:
You really gotta get a handle on that, Oralloy.


I'm doing fine. Relentlessly sticking to the truth is a winning strategy.


You are far from sticking to the truth, Oralloy...but you are amusing. I'll give ya that.

Keep on with the amusement. We can all use it.
Frank Apisa
 
  4  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 01:59 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
More anti-American 'gun control' put in place by democrats now will only harm democrats in 2014 and 2016.


If you truly think that is the case, shouldn't you be rooting for the Democrats to put more in place????
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:08 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
The games may have given him an image of being powerful, and hyper-masculine


So does NFL and many an American movie and novel. Hyper-masculinity is embedded in US culture.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:11 pm
@Val Killmore,
Your chosen avatar is a sufficient explanation.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:23 pm
@ossobuco,
That additional information is very helpful to understand what might have triggered Lance's killing spree. I'm not sure any parent can foresee that kind of result from taking action to have their son committed.

"Intuition" will never work under these circumstances.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:25 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

Quote:
There is no evidence that suggests stricter gun laws would have prevented the Newton attack, none.

That's mainly because, in this particular instance, the killer's mother wasn't a very responsible gun owner--she failed to properly secure her mini-arsenal--and she paid a price for that, it cost her her life.

And, if the killer hadn't been able to get his hands on that particularly rapid and efficient killing machine, the damage would likely have been more limited--the response of law enforcement to the school was incredibly fast.

The attack could have been prevented if Mrs Lanza had locked up her mini-arsenal. But that's one problem with having these weapons in the home--not all gun owners are responsible.


Reportedly she believed that a social breakdown was coming and felt she needed to protect herself with guns. This may be a sign of mental illness in the mother.
JPB
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:39 pm
@wandeljw,
Has it been established that the guns were not locked up? 20 year old Adam lived in the home. He may well have known where to find a key to a locked gun safe/rack.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:41 pm
@Ragman,
I had to commit both of my parents, both horrible experiences for them and me.
My father was suicidal and I called for help that day, help not so good or wise in any way back then in the sixties - I didn't get the consequences when making that phone call, the treatment at that time for a man in despair; my mother, later, was wandering for miles, twice, with alzheimers, which wasn't a word most of us knew then. I was an only child, so my grief is for both, what they went through, is great and personal.

I can see how the mother's request for guardianship would have been traitorous to Lanza. I can absolutely see why she needed his care set in place so that he wouldn't be on the streets, that she could keep helping him (well, as she saw things).

I bet this is a common quandary.

firefly
 
  2  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:49 pm
@Ragman,
Quote:
I think the nature of his afflication was anti-cocial in that he had no ability to understand and interact with others.

He had an ability to understand and interact with others, although those abilities were apparently somewhat limited by his neurodevelopmental disorder. He was able to function in structured social situations, he attended school, belonged to a club for techies in high school, and, after high school, he attended college part-time.

It's more that he was asocial, rather than anti-social. He was withdrawn and relatively non-verbally communicative, seems to have lacked any real social life, and may have been poor at picking up on other people's social or emotional cues, but he didn't go around breaking rules, or getting into fights at school, or setting fires, or harming animals, or doing the sorts of things one associates with anti-social behavior in children and adolescents. And no one, outside of his home, reports witnessing any aggressive or violent behaviors on his part before this shooting rampage.

I don't discount your hypothesis that some medication may have adversely affected him, but, if that's the case, someone had to be writing prescriptions and they have yet to come forward, and no one in law enforcement has mentioned any medication being found in the home. Another possibility is that he was on medication, like an anti-depressant, which he abruptly stopped taking, something that could increase depression and trigger suicidal ideation.

I also don't discount my hypothesis that constantly playing violent video games, particularly by someone who is otherwise socially isolated and quite inept and powerless in the real world, may have helped to fuel and stimulate violent fantasies and a desire to be able to attain that sort of power in the real world by using the real weapons that were in his home and available to him.

The more I think about it, the more I think this whole rampage may have been an expression of a suicidal depression. He may well have been depressed about the lack of a future he saw for himself, given his particular disabilities, and his final acts may have been designed to show the world he had the degree of power he had only previously experienced in video games--his final image would not be that of a gawky nerd and misfit, but of an immensely powerful warrior. Had he not had his mother's mini-arsonal so easily available to him, with a weapon so similar to that in the video games, those fantasies would probably not have turned into reality. But that fantasy did likely include suicide as it's conclusion, just as it did with the Columbine killers.

His mother may have been trying to make some long-range plans for him in some sort of supported living arrangement program, she knew she wouldn't be around forever to watch over him. I really doubt she was trying to get him psychiatrically locked up somewhere because she felt threatened by him, or feared some lack of control on his part. If that was the case, she certainly should have locked those guns up, or gotten them out of the house. To do otherwise wouldn't make much sense.

But we really don't know what was going on in that home between Adam and his mother, or even whether his mother was an emotionally stable individual. If his father or brother ever decide to speak publicly, we might know a lot more.



Ragman
 
  2  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:53 pm
@ossobuco,
You have my sincerest sympathies. I can barely imagine how devastating it was on you and your family to go through that once, never mind twice. Those times the public was so uninformed about such issues - not that we've advanced so far now.

As a sidelight to this whole issue and subsequent tragedies, perhaps, some good may come from this may be that it sheds more light as to the need for education to the public at large about such adult/parental caretaking issues, meds and med/interactions/withdrawals and the psychiatric commital process and/or the caretaking of those who are so disabled after they're gone.

On a different note, my friends and I recently lost a close friend (age 61) to suicide. His volatility/fragility/violent mood swings, his meds and the mis-administration of psychiatric perscriptions may have also been a contributor to his suicide. It is an unknown and may remain that way.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:58 pm
@Ragman,
Thank you. I don't talk about all that, re the short hairs. Just saying that I might understand the mother.
Ragman
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 02:59 pm
@ossobuco,
I understand. It's generous of you to share this info. It allows a more intimate look into the difficulties of what MIGHT have been going in the mind of the mother.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 03:10 pm
@ossobuco,
Quote:
It allows a more intimate look into the difficulties of what MIGHT have been going in the mind of the mother.

What we don't know is why this mother seems to have developed such a love of guns, and why she apparently suddenly began collecting them, at about the same time her marriage ended in divorce a few years ago, or what that sudden acquisition of all of those guns on her part communicated to her son.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 03:12 pm
@firefly,
Those are all big question marks which will have many different answers. I doubt very much we can determine those issues from what we know now.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 03:14 pm
@firefly,
How important is that? I am not discounting that,...but personally I just see thias dynamic as one of the facts that made up their home dynamics. How she let her son have target practice and what is more important and more troubling to me is the number of arms and whether or not there was free access to Adam.

And, mercy sakes, well reported is that he was trying to buy yet another rifle the week before at Dick's Sporting Goods. Wonder if she knew about that, too?

Guns, guns, and more guns.
firefly
 
  1  
Wed 19 Dec, 2012 03:20 pm
@Ragman,
Well, he made sure his mother wouldn't be around to tell his secrets. He also made sure his computer wouldn't reveal them either.

We may well never know what was really going on with him, or with his mother.

 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 03/03/2025 at 04:31:41