Connecticut school shooting

[xRUSTYx]

So you think she bought guns for either or both? She may have bought one for the 24 y/o as a gift but if she bought

one for the 20 y/o, she would be complicit since she should have known the kid was a mental defect. I doubt straw

buying has anything to do with it. Complicit not necessarily legally, but since she was his mother, she should have

known something about her kid with something like this.

 

It could go a couple ways ...

 

1)  It was the brothers rifle and he kept it at his mothers house.  Especially if he was still in school (college) perhaps? 

 

2)  Mom could have bought/registered it but it was a gift for her 24 yr old son.  Kept at the mothers house

 

3)  Mom could have knowingly bought it for the 20 yr old which would be illegal

 

4)  It was indeed owned & operated by the mother

 

Could go any which way at this point ...

 

At the end of the day ... Responsible gun ownership means keeping them fully secure and knowing where they are 24/7/365.  Something as simple as a sturdy safe could have atleast deferred or limited the damage caused today. 

Edited December 15, 2012 by xRUSTYx

[vontar]

Makes me want to cry. 18 littles ones shot helpless in their seats. Why the hell did anyone want to do this? Jesus.

Last I heard Jesus wasn't allowed in School.

 

This is truly awful.  I was driving back from Middle TN when I heard the news.

[Garufa]

Can we keep the crackpot theories to a minimum please?  The source of the guns will come out eventually.

 

Even if his mother did buy them she's dead now. 

[Chucktshoes]

These firearms were legally owned/registered by the perp's mother. Therefore, the son *Stole* them and used them. He committed several felonies PRIOR to actually killing anyone.


I could be wrong, but I suspect that the purchases for the firearms were arguably straw purchases by the mother for the son/s. A Glock, Sig, and AR-15 by a CT female teacher? It may come out that she was an avid sportswoman, but in my line of thinking I would say that the typical mother that simply wishes to protect her family would purchase one firearm for the home and consider it enough.

I say that she purchased the weapons for her son/s because they were interested in guns but were not old enough to purchase them for themselves at the time of purchase.

I'm one of the last folks to ever be accused of being PC, but seriously dude? That is sexist as hell. I know several women who are well into shooting and own military pattern rifles because they bought them. I am just gonna call it like I see it and tell you that you were talking out of the wrong orifice there.

[QuietDan]

Good call. One handgun, yeah, I could see a single woman having a firearm for home defense, but three? And one of them a bushmaster (by some reports). That's really not a firearm you see many women buying. I know that there are probably a few women into AR-15 type guns, but not many. It's really more appealing to young men.

Speculation, but you might have a situation where there was a divorce and the woman ended up with her former husband's guns just to spite him. Happens often enough to mention.

[xRUSTYx]

Can we keep the crackpot theories to a minimum please?  The source of the guns will come out eventually.

 

Even if his mother did buy them she's dead now. 

 

I wouldn't call them crackpot theories.  Threads like this are posted on to try and understand or theorize why someone could do such a horrible thing.  Discussions on how he acquired the firearms, his background, etc... are all on the table. 

[mav]

I have mixed emotions about this tragedy.  It breaks my heart, and I feel absolutely terrible for the families and children.  I don't even have the words to express my sympathy.

 

The reason I said I have mixed emotions about this is because I am also absolutely livid at politicians like Bloomberg.  What kind of f***ing human being does it take to exploit this tragedy to push some bull**** agenda?  I guarantee you there are some who probably celebrated over this because they see opportunity.  It is just sickening.

[GlockSpock]

I'm one of the last folks to ever be accused of being PC, but seriously dude? That is sexist as hell. I know several women who are well into shooting and own military pattern rifles because they bought them. I am just gonna call it like I see it and tell you that you were talking out of the wrong orifice there.

 

Well then I guess I am even less politically correct than you. I still stand behind my statement though. First, I stated that I could be wrong. I tried to briefly find statistics but had a hard time doing so, and I could be wrong in assuming that the statistics show it as I believe it is, but I believe that statistically speaking women are less likely to own multiple guns as well as statistically speaking women are less likely to own AR-15's. 

 

Sure, there are many females (such as my aunt) who own more firearms than a lot of us on TGO, but statistically speaking I believe the two statements above to be true. Show me statistics otherwise and I will retract both of them and concede my point. These are statements that are based solely upon my suspicions, and have no statistics to back them up.

[Guest 270win]

The 20 year old shooter could have bought and possessed a Connecticut compliant AR rifle.  It seems to be that Connecticut does not allow 18-20 year olds to possess handguns or buy them from private individuals like we can in TN.  He obviously was too young to have a Conn license to carry.  Multiple laws broken even before the boy killed people.  Connecticut if I remember bans magazines over 10 or 15 rounds.

[Murgatroy]

This was a tragic event.

 

I can not even imagine how the parents of the school children feel. Victim and survivor.

 

I came home and hugged my daughter, it took me ten minutes to let go.

 

I am abhorred that it has already turned into a gun argument. 

 

I read it somewhere in this thread already:

 

"Too many folks mistake coffins for soapboxes."

 

That is what sickens me the most.

[GlockSpock]

Connecticut if I remember bans magazines over 10 or 15 rounds.

 

According to Brady, they don't ban magazines at all. Or at least they don't give them any points for it:

 

http://www.bradycampaign.org/stategunlaws/scorecard/CT/

 

I believe roughly a year or two ago they tried, but I don't think it was actually passed.

[Guest Longshot1]

I am more of a reader than a writer but this begs difference. My questions are:
How many times did this kid get corporal punishment at home and school for serious transgressions? You know, butt whippings.

How many times did he go to church with both parents?

How many video games with violent themes did he own or was a fan of?

How many team sports did he play between the ages of 6 and 18?

His mother owned guns, did he ever have a firearm safety course?

I could go on but the liberals will take the easy out. They will go home, smoke some weed, sleep with their same sex partner and blame semi auto weapons. We have failed and let people inclined to that behavior, and people that promote it, take over our country. The fix is not impossible but seems improbable from where I am. Kiss your loved ones and hold them and your choice of firearms close as this is not getting better.

[Garufa]

I wouldn't call them crackpot theories.  Threads like this are posted on to try and understand or theorize why someone could do such a horrible thing.  Discussions on how he acquired the firearms, his background, etc... are all on the table. 

 

Understood.  Here's mine.  The kid was retarted, or whatever politically correct term you prefer for his disorder.  He held great resentment for his mother, a teacher, who showed more attention to her kids at school and was more proud of them than him.

 

He couldn't handle the years of jealousy brewing in his mind.  Got hold of a gun, which is extremely easy in this country, and went to set things right. 

 

We can theorize and opinionate all we like.  The outcome of this devestating tragedy will not be kind to gun owners or others who believe in certains "rights".

[Oh Shoot]

... Connecticut if I remember bans magazines over 10 or 15 rounds.

Nope.

[Guest Fingersoup]

Did anyone catch the older lady reporter on CNN that was playing a typical talking-head and reported his firearms as a 'Glock', a 'Sig Souzer' and a 'Bushwacker' model 223' "that shoots ammunition like the military uses in Afghanistan".. You also keep hearing reporters and guest calling them 'automatic weapons' on all the news channels just feeding the general public's ignorance and fear for political motives.

[Guest Mad4rcn]

It's a crazy world we live in.

[G27ATT]

[quote name='Fingersoup' timestamp='1355534019' post='860426']Did anyone catch the older lady reporter on CNN that was playing a typical talking-head and reported his firearms as a 'Glock', a 'Sig Souzer' and a 'Bushwacker' model 223' "that shoots ammunition like the military uses in Afghanistan".. You also keep hearing reporters and guest calling them 'automatic weapons' on all the news channels just feeding the general public's ignorance and fear for political motives.[/quote] Holy shit. I've heard them assign the name AK47 to EVERYTHING but this is blowing my mind. A simple Google search could really help these people sound less clueless. Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2

[gnmwilliams]

[quote name="mav" post="860387" time="1355531675"]I have mixed emotions about this tragedy.  It breaks my heart, and I feel absolutely terrible for the families and children.  I don't even have the words to express my sympathy.   The reason I said I have mixed emotions about this is because I am also absolutely livid at politicians like Bloomberg.  What kind of f***ing human being does it take to exploit this tragedy to push some bull**** agenda?  I guarantee you there are some who probably celebrated over this because they see opportunity.  It is just sickening.[/quote] I wouldn't use the term "human being" to describe Bloomberg myself

[Guest Longshot1]

A couple of more questions came to my mind around gun laws and the people who make them:

Scenario1, I am visiting friends in Newtown, Conn today. I ride with one of them for a conference at Sandy Hook School. I am carrying but have a Tn. HCP. Just don't leave home without it. My friend enters the school but I remain behind as I am already nervous about having my firearm. I see a suspicious person enter and moments later all hell breaks loose. I run to the interior of the school and encounter shooter. He has already fired his weapon but does not draw down on me. He moves to the door way of a classroom. I draw and fire. A teacher has just exited the class and I hit them in the shoulder causing a flesh wound. I fire again with a head shot and the shooter goes down. My carry instructors words come back to me that I own the bullet when it leaves the barrel. I am sued in a liberal state by the parents of the shooter and the wounded teacher. I lose everything I own and spend time in prison.

Scenario 2, I sit in the car while my friend enters the school and I hear gunfire resulting in 26 deaths. I followed the letter of the law as influenced by a liberal government and supported by a like Supreme Court.

Who is at fault for the shooting? The guns? I think not. In Scenario 2 am I at fault when I could have saved lives? To the families of the dead and to my conscience until the day I died, I was at fault.


Firearms will be a scapegoat to the many who can't put together all the pieces that lead up to a tragedy like this. Our system has failed or we have just faced an evil in the world that can't be stopped in a random act. Grieve the dead, pray for those children that witnessed and survived.

[Patton]

Well that's a bugger but in TN I couldn't see you being charged or at least indicted by a grand jury. TN law states that even if your carrying a handgun without a permit but use it in self defense there isn't supposed to be a charge of carrying with intent to go armed. If you entered a gun free zone to terminate a shooter than yeah I think you might get commended. Now civilly your a** is out there for the taking. Edited December 15, 2012 by Patton

[DaveS]

Folks, I quit reading this thread on page six...I do not tend to give the shooter anymore attention. He's a worthless nobody coward!!!

 

Rest in Peace Little Children!! Rest softly in God's hands!

 

Dave S

[JayC]

Just a quick heads up, it appears while he did have a .223 Bushmaster he never entered the school with it...  It was found locked in the truck of his car, and seems not to have been fired at the school.

 

Seems the media isn't highlighting this little fact.

 

So, just keep that in mind when you hear calls to ban 'assault weapons' one wasn't even used in this crime.

Edited December 15, 2012 by JayC

[GlockSpock]

Well that's a bugger but in TN I couldn't see you being charged or at least indicted by a grand jury. TN law states that even if your carrying a handgun without a permit but use it in self defense there isn't supposed to be a charge of carrying with intent to go armed. If you entered a gun free zone to terminate a shooter than yeah I think you might get commended. Now civilly your a** is out there for the taking.a

 

I think his main concern is that in his hypothetical situation even though he saved many peoples' lives by stopping the shooter he also let a bullet graze one of the teachers and fears that he will be sued and possibly incriminated for this fact. I think back to the movie "SWAT" in which the cocky SWAT officer stops the hostage tackers but also wounds one of the hostages. I think in the movie it was mentioned that even though he possibly saved the hostage's life, she was suing the city. Actually a very likely scenario I believe, to save many lives but be sued because you may make a mistake or aren't 100% proficient.

[G27ATT]

[quote name='CZ9MM' timestamp='1355537290' post='860478'] Well that's a bugger but in TN I couldn't see you being charged or at least indicted by a grand jury. TN law states that even if your carrying a handgun without a permit but use it in self defense there isn't supposed to be a charge of carrying with intent to go armed. If you entered a gun free zone to terminate a shooter than yeah I think you might get commended. Now civilly your a** is out there for the taking.a   I think his main concern is that in his hypothetical situation even though he saved many peoples' lives by stopping the shooter he also let a bullet graze one of the teachers and fears that he will be sued and possibly incriminated for this fact. I think back to the movie "SWAT" in which the cocky SWAT officer stops the hostage tackers but also wounds one of the hostages. I think in the movie it was mentioned that even though he possibly saved the hostage's life, she was suing the city. Actually a very likely scenario I believe, to save many lives but be sued because you may make a mistake or aren't 100% proficient.[/quote] Sad situation because things like this make people like me only shoot back for me and mine. Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2

[DaveS]

Folks, the sad thing of this whole situation (besides the loss of inocent lives) is that everywhere any of us carry somewhat concealed and printing, or carrying open, we're gonna get the law called on us by someone who thinks we're up to no good. Do we continue to carry or lay off for a few days? I think I'm gonna back off for a bit.

 

Dave S