16 Dec

Unimaginable

                                       

generic cialis-87110″ />

It was such a thrill to be named an author. I did not expect the day to end as it did.

Newtown is not 15 miles from where we live. A teacher we know taught at Sandy Hook school but now teaches at the middle school. One of his students lost a sibling. My wife’s sister’s father in law was Principal at the school for some time. He is devastated but is intent on helping restore the school.

Sadness pervades the air in the state. It is the same sense of loss we felt in the aftermath of 9-11. I have been trying to organize intelligible something to write- and I am not sure I yet have.

Our first notification was one of a shooting at the school and that the gunman was dead.

So far, so good.

I left to run some errands and when I returned home the death toll was over 20 and most were children. And it only got worse.

There have been all kinds of reports fraught with error.

What seems accurate at this point is that the weapons were all legal. One of the first things to go through our minds was “How did this kid get hold of them?” Why were they not locked up or why were there no trigger locks?

It also is pretty obvious that shooter was not mentally well.

At Newtown High School, Adam Lanza had trouble relating to fellow students and teachers, but that was only part of his problem. He seemed not to feel physical or psychological pain in the same way as classmates.

Richard Novia, the school district’s head of security until 2008, who also served as adviser for the school technology club, said Lanza clearly “had some disabilities.”

“If that boy would’ve burned himself, he would not have known it or felt it physically,” Novia told The Associated Press in a phone interview. “It was my job to pay close attention to that.”

Novia was responsible for monitoring students as they used soldering tools and other potentially dangerous electrical equipment.

He recalled meeting with school guidance counselors, administrators and with the boy’s mother, Nancy Lanza, to understand his problems and find ways to ensure his safety. But there were other crises only a mother could solve.

“He would have an episode, and she’d have to return or come to the high school and deal with it,” Novia said, describing how the young man would sometimes withdraw completely “from whatever he was supposed to be doing,” whether it was sitting in class or reading a book.

Adam Lanza “could take flight, which I think was the big issue, and it wasn’t a rebellious or defiant thing,” Novia said. “It was withdrawal.”

Most victims were shot with the rifle- suffering 3 to 11 wounds each. That’s overkill on a large scale. 11 rounds from a rifle in a 6 year old. It’s gut wrenching.

Unimaginable.

It is also reported that Lanza shot his mother in the face. If so, that makes the killing very personal.

Here are the victims and some background. It’s worth your time.

Nancy Lanza was reportedly a gun enthusiast and is said to have taken Adam to gun ranges to learn how to shoot.

There is also mention of a possible altercation at the school the day before the shooting.

There have been all kinds of calls for more and stricter gun control:

Terrible news today. When will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons? As in Oz after similar tragedy.

Says Rupert Murdoch.

None of the weapons used in this tragedy were automatic.

Lanza reportedly tried to purchase a rifle from Dick’s Sporting Goods but was refused.

Possession of semi-automatic handguns and rifles seem an inappropriate therapy for mentally disturbed individuals. Hopefully among the cacophony about the weapons a sensible policy for the mentally ill will emerge. That’s very likely what this really is about.

That and the responsible handling of weapons.

This just knocks the stuffing out of you. I this post makes a little sense.

About DrJohn

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.
This entry was posted in Disasters, Personal, Politics, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Sunday, December 16th, 2012 at 4:02 pm
| 708 views

31 Responses to Unimaginable

  1. Rides A Pale Horse says: 1

    It has already turned into a gun control issue. Forget about dealing with the mental health aspect, it’s about guns dontcha know. Oh and gun LAWS too! Since the hundreds of gun laws we already have on the books have done sooooo much good! Since guns themselves are the bad guy (always) I’m beginning to believe that the lefty anti-gunners see them as:
    http://i979.photobucket.com/albums/ae277/RAPH6969/121.jpg

    And as far as gun LAWS go. Ask these guys about that:
    http://i979.photobucket.com/albums/ae277/RAPH6969/125.jpg

    ReplyReply
  2. Sgt. Rock says: 2

    I am an Army veteran, registered Republican and proud fire-arms owner.
    My wife and I foster dogs and cats for a local no- kill shelter. In light of the recent tragedy I was struck by the fact that a family that recently adopted one of our foster kittens had to fill-out way more paper work than I did when I purchased my Bushmaster.
    I know all the arguments against gun control, hell I’ve debated them myself with my pinko brother-in-law, but I guess that the death of so many innocent children made me think. Its time to make it as difficult to purchase a fire-arm as it is to adopt a kitten.

    ReplyReply
  3. retire05 says: 3

    There are those who are already trying to exploit the Newtown tragedy. Yeah, Dick Durbin, I’m talking about you. Durbin, et al, are screaming “See, this is why we need even more gun laws.” Well, here is my response to Durbin and his Socialist friends, all the way to the White House: disarm the gangbangers in Chicago, New York and L.A. and we’ll talk. Stop making gun “free” zones where everyone of these mass shootings in the last few years have happened, and where I am not able to protect myself and I risk simply becoming another random target, and we’ll talk. Create laws where school officials can report a disturbed kid to the authorities without the fear of some ambulance chasing lawyer suing them, and we’ll talk.

    How absurd is Richard Novia, who clearly knew that Lanza had some “disabilities” (see, we can’t even call it what it was, mental illness) and it was his job to “pay close attention to that.” No, Mr. Novia, it was your job to report Lanza’s mental problems to those that could have perhaps got Lanza the mental health treatment he obviously needed. Richard Novia is a clear example of political correctness that often costs the lives of others. He didn’t feel the need to pick up the phone, call the Newtown Police chief and say “Hey, I got a pretty disturbed kid here and he needs to be monitored.” How many people dropped the ball on Lanza, Loughtner and the Columbine shooters?

    These sites, like schools, like the Aurora, Colorado theater, were picked for one reason. They were target rich areas where law abiding citizens would not be armed. These shooters knew there would be no resistance to speak of. They went in those places with the clear intent of taking as many lives as possible before they took their own. Loughtner was clearly different as he did not know if anyone would be armed and he never intended to take his own life. But how many school shooters have?

    ReplyReply
  4. mathman says: 4

    THIS WAR IS LOST.
    The winners are the ACLU, the privacy rights advocates, the anti death penalty advocates, and the usual coterie of bleeding hearts. So long as laws are on the books granting protection to those who plan to do harm, we will have such tragedies. So long as we have laws making it a crime to hospitalize someone who is mentally ill, we will have wackos roaming the landscape.
    The makers of these laws meant well. But what they did was to endanger the many for the sake of the few.
    Gun control? How? House by house search? Mandatory confiscation? Look at Washington, DC. Gun control there was extreme. Only the criminals had guns; over 600 a year were killed with illegal guns. Sure worked well.
    And then null pros was used on the alleged perpetrators, since the gun use statute was deemed too harsh by prosecutors.
    How, precisely, do you take all the guns away? Magic?
    No, the bleeding hearts have what they want. Lots of blood to cry over.

    ReplyReply
  5. on another angle, if you have a kid which show mental withdraw disturbence
    in school among other kids, he is a definite target for insult which we don’t know how it register how deep, how negative, and he should respond to it one day closer or later, because we don’t read his thoughts he doesn’t express it,
    it make him a danger to other kids who share his dayly life every day, and the other danger is the way he would revenge, even without a weapon like this one had access to.
    we see kids disapear very often school kid, never to be found, or found dead, it is done by those sick mentally person
    who had been let free without any help
    that ‘s the amount of the other side of bad actions which could be done without a gun, but same tragedy,
    for the other young living among a problem mentally sick young,
    he is a danger for society, how can he be allowed with other children vulnerable the most who could try to make friend with him and be the first target of the other planning his revenge, because the other not knowing the danger,
    so the priority are not to focus on gun owner but to focus on mental disturb persons of any age,
    who mingle with other in school , university, or other,
    we have to know that they have some exceptional aptitudes for some skills, which make them pass through the loophole and found highly smart because of it, but highly still unpredicteble dangerous
    just because they cannot express their thoughts, or discard it as bad thoughts, or and make the difference between good and bad,
    I just heard the RIGHT WORD FROM THE STATE POLICE AT FOX NOW,
    THAT IS “ANALYSING ”
    THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS, AND NOT ABLE TO DUMP THE NEGATIVES ONES, which amplifyed the more they are kept
    in the thought process

    ReplyReply
  6. bwax says: 6

    It seems to me a lot of these problems became more and more common when we took religion out of the schools, and now we even are takeng religion out of the public sphere. A lot of kids these days grow up with violent video games that glorify violence, is it any wonder they are desensitised to evil? And too, our entertainment is rife with violence, sex and loose living. What should we expect when we glorify those things that we grew up to believe was improper?

    Also, we have a sitting president that refuses to open his files to verify his eligibility. When the highest office in the land has so little regard for the law, what can one expect from the populace?

    When we outlaw guns, only the criminals will have them. Then the government can begin the road to socialism/communism/facism that occured in Europe early in the last century.

    ReplyReply
  7. bwax
    you touch a very important factor there,
    and on an permanent level that it is, many kids can develop bad temperment
    because of the constant negative effect targeting their mind, taking more room than the positive input like GOD’S BLESSINGS, LOVE FROM THEIR PARENTS AND KINDNESS FROM THEIR TEACHERS
    WHICH TAKE SECOND IMPORTANCE TO THE NEGATIVES INPUT, NEFARIOUS TO A GROWING YOUNG MIND,

    ReplyReply
  8. Silverfiddle says: 8

    I am posting this at every blog I visit that is addressing the Sandy Hook tragedy, so I apologize in advance, but it is critical we bring facts to this discussion.

    It is an emotional topic, and I can understand the gun-haters’emotional outbursts, but we must respond with charity and the facts.

    Fact #1: Violent crime is down from 2000 to 2009, as is the use of a firearm in commission of a crime.

    Here are a few excellent links:

    Aweful Reactions to Sandy Hook Shooting

    Here is a link to an DOJ report:

    US DOJ Report: Criminal Victimization, 2009

    Some excerpts from the report:

    “For overall violent crime, firearms, knives, and other weapons were used in about equal proportions”

    Weapons were used in 22% of all violent crimes in 2009

    “Between 2000 and 2009, the overall rate of firearm violence declined from 2.4 to 1.4 victimizations per 1,000 persons age 12 or older (table 10).”

    Firearms were used in about 8% of all violent crime incidents in 2009.

    During the 10-year period, about 6% to 9% of all violent crime incidents were committed with firearms”

    Established facts and Christian charity must be our departure point in our search for answers.

    ReplyReply
  9. Phil-351 says: 9

    @Sgt. Rock:

    I respectfully disagree with your assessment. The current gun laws PREVENTED Adam from purchasing a firearm on his own. He had to steal them from his mother, possibly having to kill her in the process or intended to kill her either way. I could go on about the kitten adoption process, just to become a kitten guardian (not owner), but that is way off topic.

    Couple that with the fact that Adam Lanza suffered notable mental issues for a long time shows this nation has a problem handling mental illness, not gun control. Read this article about a mother conflicted with a child with behavior problems and finding help for him. Thinking the Unthinkable

    ReplyReply
  10. Nan G says: 10

    @bwax: @ilovebeeswarzone: You both are touching on the latest liberal lie: that evil is just a matter of different tastes for different people.
    I can recall teacher-led as well as student-led prayer in school.
    Things hadn’t disintegrated as fast as people feared when prayer was first taken out of school.
    It took a while.
    A child’s mind needs filling all the time.
    If not prayer then what?
    Violent video games, cartoons, movies, graphic comic books, gross-out females like Lady Gaga and Madonna, filthy-mouthed men doing what passes for music and so on.
    Children who stand out for nearly any reason are medicated into a drooling mass.
    The side effects of so many of these meds leads many children to avoid taking their meds as ordered.
    In this young man’s case guns were readily available.
    Mom certainly paid the price for that mistake.
    But IF Obama wants to do something to help with what caused the problem he needs to look past guns and into how children spend all of their time every day.
    HOLLYWOOD is Obama’s buddy.
    Will Obama hold Hollywood’s feet to the fire for all of their complicity in putting violence in front of children?

    ReplyReply
  11. Nan G
    yes, before touching the legitimite gun owners, OBAMA would certainly be wise to shot the games refering to kill WHITE OF JAMIE FOX MOVIES, MADE BY SPIKE, THE ONE WHO HAD CALL FOR LYNCHING ON ZIMMERMAN AND PROVIDE HIS ADDRESS.
    JAMIE FOX WHO HAD THE BALLS TO SAY IT WITH A LAUGHING SMURF ON HIS FACE,
    AND WOULD OBAMA DARE TO CUT ALL THE GAMES WITH ANY SHOOTHING HANDLE,
    THOSE WHICH KIDS WANT FOR CHRISTMAS,
    AND WOULD HE DARE TO BAN ANY VIOLENT MOVIE,
    that should be a start at the root of children behavioral problems,
    because they abuse their game time, and get to dream of it, like an imprint in their mind bad for them.

    ReplyReply
  12. Enchanted says: 12

    As a mother my heart is breaking for all of the families. I can only imagine what it would be like to lose one of my daughters or my grandson. I am not sure if I could go on. I can’t look at the pictures of those beautiful children and the heroic teachers for fear I will break down.

    I realize bullets from weapons did kill these people, but the weapons could not have killed or wounded anyone unless there was a human finger pulling the trigger. CT has a very strict gun law. Chicago has a very strict gun law and they have one of the highest murder rates in the country. I don’t believe that banning guns will stop deranged people from killing others. I don’t think that banning guns will stop gang bangers from killing others. I just don’t. For the record, I do not own a weapon. However I have been thinking about it.

    ReplyReply
  13. Sgt. Rock,
    yes, you are right on, like Nan G, mentioned, in CA. THEY MAKE YOU WAIT,
    and enough to get some to show their anger, that might be the purpose to analyze it.
    but other place sell it only on demand in those shows, it seem that anyone can buy one,
    and the government gun walking proved it, by a border trooper being shot and kill by the criminal buying AMERICAN GUN JUST WITH A SMILE ON THEIR FACE,
    we’re not done with that one either, there are more gun s not retrieved in there
    across the border,
    by the way, that is good of you and your wife to help the cats

    ReplyReply
  14. Dc says: 14

    No matter what you may or may not think about “gun control”….it’s a impossible task. There are already FAR too many guns out there to control anything. And any “ban” thy put in place in regards to manf of high capacity mags, etc…(as well intentioned as those things might be)…are pointless and useless in so far as doing anything other than making people feel better, or feel that something is being done.

    Manf just ramp up production to produce enough high capacity mags before the end date..that there will be plenty for sale (at higher price of course) through out such “ban” periods (as was the case the last time). Further, if people plan on doing this…perhaps it might help them to educate themselves on firearms in the first place.

    These shootings all share one thing in common….the people who did were nut jobs that people were already aware of prior to them finally picking up a gun and using it. And in at least 2 cases (columbine and this one)…the guns were not purchased, but taken from unsecured parents stashes. This also happens when parents leave unsecured weapons when they have children…who manage to get hold of them…and end up shooting themsevles or another child with it.

    The other thing that all these shootings have in common is that they all occurred in areas or locations where private carry is banned. Private citizens are left to wrest handguns and knives away from maniacs bent on killing and usually end up getting the worst of it before it’s all said and done.

    The police…”cannot” help you here. And guns are already banned at school. Banning them further wouldn’t help that particular situation. You could put armed guards at schools..and the killers would more than likely pick another target, but it won’t stop people from doing something like that. Further, so long as their are high capacity weapons…or weapons capable of mass damage…they’ll use them. And again…it would be impossible for the gov to limit these weapons to the point that crazy people who were unsupervised and otherwise had access to them wouldn’t use them. EVEN if they tried to confiscate “all” weapons in the country. Impossible.

    So, it would seem to me…that what’s gonna have to change to make “any’ impact on this…is focus more on the people doing it. In Riwanda…they killed hundreds of thousands of people with machetes and axes. Entire villages hacked to death. Was it the machete that did it? Or cause them to be able to do that? OR was it depravity of the human mind and spirit that caused that? If you removed every machete there…you’d still have people who were intent on killing others any way they could. Perhaps it might take longer. But, does that really address the issue?

    I think arguments to say..that if all weapons that existed today had only a few bullets…that in such situations where it’s too late (ie., the kid goes ballastic and ends up at a school with the gun)…that he might have had a few less reloads or rounds to shoot off in the 10 mins he had before police even arrived at the scene and that this somehow would have inherently meant that he wouldn’t have sat there…with police at bay….shooting those kids even if it took longer to do it. (ie., maybe there would have been 5 or 10 dead…instead of 26).

    I find that argument a little short sighted. But, even if I didn’t…the premise is impossible. If someone is trained in reloads…even a 7 shot clip (last ban limit was 10)….can be changed in a few seconds. It would have made little difference to those waiting their turn to be shot. And all it would take is “two” of those (one in each hand). I’m not really seeing how that makes much difference to the outcome. And it surely would not prevent nor deter those people intent on committing such acts.

    Recognizing and keeping a deranged, mentally unstable young person bent on killing as many people as he can away from guns and schools and malls, etc…would probably be the better route to take to have any impact on this situation. I share everyone’s grief over the horrific crime.

    ReplyReply
  15. Hard Right says: 15

    Sgt. Rock, did you have to go thru a federal instant backround check to adopt that kitten?
    I would urge you not to let emotion overule common sense in this issue. More paperowrk will solve nothing.

    ReplyReply
  16. Common Sense says: 16

    It amazese that gun control freaks are the same group of liberal wachos who will hide behind someones right to chose as an excuse to murder thousands of children every year!! If they where really serious about prevention of children being murdered they would start with prevention of abortion!!

    ReplyReply
  17. harp1034 says: 17

    @Sgt. Rock: Well Rock, if that is the way you feel about then you need to turn in your Bushmaster to the police. As a matter of fact you should get rid of any firearms that you own. If you or family need protection, just call 9-1-1. Weaklings like you don’t need guns. You have showed that you can’t take the heat.

    ReplyReply
  18. Nan G says: 18

    @Sgt. Rock:
    Even in CA where guns are very difficult to get, adopting a kitten is more difficult.
    We had to fill out forms, take tests, have a background check then also wait 30 days for every gun we’ve bought in CA.
    In trying to adopt a kitten, we had to fill out forms, swear to take better care of the animal than of ourselves, promise to allow spot visits in future and to NEVER let her go outside then submit to a pre-adoption home visit!
    She’s a great cat, though.
    Not as smart as a few of our guns, however.
    LOL!
    At least she uses her box.

    ReplyReply
  19. harp1034
    I know what Sgt. Rock mean by making it difficult,because
    he should mentioned difficult for the one who show inapt to own a gun,
    with some recognize signs by the office there are many way to show they don’t deserve it,
    and those license providers might make it more difficult for those,
    why would you be scare if you have nothing to be afraid,
    those with a short fuse are to be more check, to make sure if they on drug would
    want to play bandit.
    all who take it seriously enough show deserving it,
    and the short fuse like you should stick with 911 call.
    for GOD SAKE SGT ROCK is an ARMY VETERAN,
    HE IS NOT AFRAID FOR SURE, CHECK BEFORE YOU INSULT A BRAVE

    ReplyReply
  20. Rides A Pale Horse
    very creative as usual only you can do that,
    thank you

    ReplyReply
  21. Dc
    yes and more horrific is that there was many gunshots on each child,
    that was a monster from hell

    ReplyReply
  22. Marine72 says: 22

    @Sgt. Rock: #2: As a retired Marine infantry officer of over 33 years service in Vietnam Era, Bn CO Desert Storm, and recalled from retirement LNO with 3rd COSCOM in Operation Iraqi Freedom (2005), I understand and see your point. Further, as a citizen of Kalifornia I am amazed at the level of gun control frenzy proselytized by the nut liberal wackos (DF) of this once beautiful state. When recently purchasing an M1A1 rifle, I purchased a full size gun safe before even knowing that Kalifornia required a safe or other physical protection for the weapon. Unfortunately, all the rules we can possibly think up are to no avail if we reasoning, responsible gun owners do not avidly practice gun safety. The safe is worthless if the weapon is not stored in it and the combination protected. The real question in this case is not on the weapons but on the human engineering that failed to protect us from ourselves.

    Its time to make it as difficult to purchase a fire-arm as it is to adopt a kitten.

    The only way more stringent rules will have any effect is for the affected to follow the rules we already have and to exercise the common sense (though obviously not so common) given us by our creator. Eliminating legal gun ownership will only assure the thug set to continue their already well documented assault on our freedoms and liberties.

    ReplyReply
  23. Marine72 says: 23

    @harp1034: #17:

    Weaklings like you don’t need guns.

    Awfully harsh rhetoric for the Sgt Rock’s considered response. I see his point, but also fully recognize that society cannot legislate against stupidity. Ms. Lanza (may she rest in peace) obviously should have better protected her weapons especially with her obvious knowledge of her son’s problems. As a grandfather living with a borderline nut grandson, I know well not to even acknowledge that my firearms exist and they are fully secured in a gun safe with 6 digit combination and the safe bolted to the concrete by a contractor. As always, the problem will always be the idiot behind the gun or their idiot facilitator.

    ReplyReply
  24. harp1034 says: 24

    @Marine72: I will not make a judgement on Mrs. Lanza. We don’t how she stored her guns. Where there is a will there is a way to steal. We don’t know for a fact that she took him shooting. The news media is insinuating that it is her fault. We don’t know the whole story. I don’t think the powers that be will tell the whole truth. Gun owners need to stand firm. We did not do it.
    Like you and Sgt. Rock I took an oath to defend the constitution from both foreign and domestic enemies. I was in Viet Nam for 16 months. I haven’t come this far to give up now. We can ride out this storm. I hope Sgt. Rock will come back.

    ReplyReply
  25. Marine72
    hi,
    the question into concealing guns, at a place where you could need to reach for
    on a limited time
    you could not have that time if too out of range, out of reach
    which nullify the need to have it,
    am I RIGHT?
    UNLESS it’s bought as a collection only, and not for use,
    I’m referring it to the attack, of the school, if someone,
    would have had a gun with a minute or less readyness to shoot, it could have avoid many deaths even all ,
    it sure take a quick thinking person able to evaluate the situation in a nano laps of time like in war attacks.
    but not everyone is able to meet that standard,
    I visualize the reaction, of that defense , first analyze,
    get the gun , load it if not already, as it should be,
    aim precisely and shoot,
    all this in the shortest time possible,
    that is before he kill you.
    bye

    ReplyReply
  26. drjohn says: 26

    It is a mental health issue. That’s about all it is

    ReplyReply
  27. Sgt. Rock says: 27

    Thank you all for your posts concerning my, at the time, emotional response to this unthinkable tragedy. However I would like to address some points enumerated therein as I feel I may have been misconstrued at best and slandered at worst. Fundamentally, it’s a simple argument, but I tend to confuse the points in my own mind because, despite all I have stood up for and defended, I feel that some how I have failed my country when things like this happen. I served, in part, to make this a better world, yet slaughter continues on our doorstep. And why should I feel responsible, you might ask? Because I have equally contributed to the casual attitude and shamefully inadequate protections against such events. In reality, my rights as a firearm owner and user are not impinged on in any way by requiring training, a waiting period, registration, voluminous paperwork, or by liabilities upon the the firearm itself such as limited magazine capacity, lack of a folding stock or bayonet lug, or by limiting the lethality or traceability of ammunition. In fact, that any need that that I may strive to meet, be it self protection, provender for my family, or simply entertainment, could not be met by a single shot fire arm is a specious argument. That this belief might constitute weakness on my part so be it, but I observe it to be the opposite. The weapons we as soldiers were trained to use were conceived and manufactured with one purpose, to kill other human beings. In as such, what other conceivable function might these awesome weapons of war fulfill for us that are not, or are no longer in the service of our country, save vanity, spite, or strife. Finally having served (I do feel I am being repetitive, but here I go again), I have every confidence that my fellows in the armed services and law enforcement would not slide down the slippery slope of confiscation, simply by the virtue of being ordered to do so. That has never been a valid excuse for wrong doing, and likewise it is our duty as those who serve to recognize unlawful orders and not to carry them out. Simply put, any arguments against sane fire arms restrictions are self serving, fake as*, macho bullsh*t, and in your heart you know it to be so. None of us are served by unrestricted access to fire arms, no matter the reason. There it is.

    ReplyReply
  28. Phil-351 says: 28

    @Sgt. Rock:

    Again, I respectfully disagree. Conneticut has some of the nation’s most restrictive gun control laws, including many of the restrictions you mentioned, and they were tested in this instance. Adam Lanza tried to obtain a firearm on his own on at least two occasions prior to the school shooting. Both times, he was rejected. The gun laws worked. Also, the current media-driven theory about the mother giving easy access to Adam to those weapons doesn’t hold water. Why would Adam seek his own firearms if the mother had given him easy access. I suspect she did have them secured, and died trying to prevent him from getting and using her guns.

    All firearms, not just the one’s you were trained for as a soldier, were designed to kill. Period. They can kill a human just as efficiently as a deer. Limiting their lethality limits their value as a protector or a provider (hunting). Reducing magazine capacity would have no effect on their overall lethality. If the reports on Sandy Hook are correct, Adam had to reload a few times to accomplish his massacre. Magazine capacity would only serve to make him reload more often, which did not hinder him in the least. And consider the reports from New York and New Jersey after the superstorm, or New Orleans after Katrina. If you were stuck in that aftermath with your family, god forbid, and had roving gangs and sounds of shots firing night after night, would you feel a single shot weapon would be sufficient? I know most would have, and did, simply left the area before the storms hit, but can you consider a similar situation with no warning and the same aftermath?

    Several years ago, a co-worker and I were working our regular night shift in an office park. One night, we heard a very loud bang. My co-worker pulled out his Taurus 9mm and aimed it down the hall where the soud came from. An armed man ran into that hall from an office with a window view, and was ordered to drop the gun and lay down. Since my co-worker had the drop on him, he complied. A couple of minutes later, an officer that was chasing him came in and took control of the situation. Without my co-worker’s gun, I’m sure we could have be hostages to that armed thug. Even though no shots had to be fired that night, the value of a firearm has been ingrained in me forever.

    So, my assessment of Sandy Hook is similar to my assessment of Aurora, CO. We have a mental health problem in this country, not a fire arms problem. Both men showed warning signs early enough, but did not receive adequate attention or treatment. I know from personal experience how hard finding treatment is. My son has Asperger’s, and we detected it 3 years ago. We’ve been to 3 different psychiatrists in those 3 years, and only the 3rd one tested him last year. He scored fairly high for Asperger’s, but is also highly functional and very intelligent. He has stated to us 3 times that he wanted to get my son into a group therapy, but even with both my wife and I pestering him, has yet to set up a therapy appointment over the last year. We’ve been stuck researching on our own and developing our own therapy as we wait. It seems that the only way to get the attention that allows us to get the help we need is to wait until something drastic happens. Then, I fear it is too late. It is hell getting insurance to cover mental health issues unless it involves substance abuse or suicide unless a dangerous situation happens first. Even if the warning signs are there. Sandy Hook Elementary, Aurora, CO, and even the New York City Subway killing, all by mentally challenged people that were not getting treatment. These are just a few of the problems we’ve faced just this year alone.

    P.S. (edit) Another mentally-challenged person wanting to rampage, but stopped this time. http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/local/cop_shop/article_082d5b2a-4ae9-11e2-a471-0019bb2963f4.html

    ReplyReply
  29. Phil-351
    I just follow the NRA, MR LAPIERRE VERY SMART SPEECH,
    he advocate for A POLICE OFFICER BE IT A VETERAN MILITARY OR OTHER SECURITY RETIREE,
    TO BE IN EACH SCHOOLS OF AMERICA BY THE BEGINNING OF THE SCHOOL YEARS,
    if you can catch his speech he answer your demands and concerns, as all the people do,
    he said one sentence to mean all the words,
    that is; if you have a bad guy with a gun, coming to hurt,,
    wouldn’t you like to have a good guy with a gun near by to come quicker than the 911 phone call?
    bye

    ReplyReply
  30. Richard Wheeler says: 30

    Sgt Rock #27 Absolutely concur.Thanks
    Semper Fi

    ReplyReply
  31. Pingback: Why don’t liberals want to address the real causes of gun violence? | Flopping Aces

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>