Adam Lanza, Not His Older Brother Ryan, Was The Newtown Shooter, Said To Be Targeting His Mother

Various media outlets were reporting earlier that Ryan Lanza was the shooter in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre this morning. This came as a surprise to Lanza, as he was still very much alive and in New Jersey. It turns out that it was his younger brother Adam Lanza who was the shooter.

The Associated Press is also reporting an official said the suspect’s girlfriend and another friend are missing in New Jersey. (Note: The story about additional missing persons appears to have been pulled)

Adam Lanza, 20, shot his mother dead and targeted her kindergarten class at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., sources said. Sources also told The Post that Lanza’s mother was a teacher at the school and he “had a dispute with her.”

28 people are dead, including 20 children, 8 adults and the shooter (Adam Lanza).

Police in Hoboken, NJ are questioning Lanza’s older brother Ryan, 24, but he is not a suspect. As various media outlets identified him as the shooter earlier today, a friend captured some screen shots of his Facebook updates…

According to CNN, a federal law enforcement source tells John King the shooter arrived and headed directly toward and to his mother’s classroom. Officials believe his mother was the primary target. However, they note he came “armed with clear intention of mass killing.”

According to authorities Adam Lanza’s mother, 52-year-old Nancy Lanza, was a kindergarten teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton. Nancy Lanza and her students were among the victims in the Connecticut school shooting. Lanza’s girlfriend and another friend are missing in New Jersey. There is confusion about whether Nancy Lanza taught at Sandy Hook. The school has no record of her, but other say she was a substitute teacher. She was not killed at the school, but at the home she shared with her son Adam.

Shortlink:

Posted by on December 14, 2012.
Filed under Breaking News.
Doug Johnson is a news junkie and long time blog reader, turned author.

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • http://twitter.com/jinx_mchue Severe Conservative

    Why do I think I will not be surprised at his choice of music and video games?

    • retired.military

      What games did he play? I have played ( and still do) first person shooters as do millions of others yet they dont turn into homicidal maniacs.

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas for me. And I’d never dream of shooting anyone in real life.

        • retired.military

          We are supposd to confiscate guns because someone MIGHT shoot someone.

          However, we cant keep convicted child molestors in prison because they might molest again. They have rights you know.

  • jim_m

    A writer for the UK Telegraphs asks: “What drives someone to do this? What kind of society creates people like this? What can we do to change that?”

    While the left instinctively reacts to take away civil liberties they miss the opportunity to actually address the problem. We no longer teach anything about morality in schools anymore. We get lessons in moral equivalence. It’s the lifeboat exercise where we are taught that people can be expendable and it doesn’t matter who dies as long as you can give the teacher a clever explanation.

    We don’t take care of each other anymore. We expect the government to do that for us so we can go blithely about our lives and ignore the needs around us.

    Mike Huckabee (Who I generally dislike) made a good point this afternoon. When asked why God would allow such a thing to happen, he said ‘why do you ask that when we have been excluding God from our schools?’ We’ve excluded God and with God we have excluded morality. Some (myself included) would argue that the ugly truth is that with God (or at least a god) there is no basis for morality so therefore we should not be surprised that we have difficulty in teaching it today.

    There is an opportunity to have a discussion about what in our culture drives people to want to kill senselessly (hint to do such does not require access to a gun so this is not about gun control). Unfortunately, the reality is that we will probably get stuck in the same old political games of the left trying to exploit a tragedy to advance their agenda rather than to actually do something that will help the country.

    • Hugh_G

      I notice on this thread and another that you have been doing exactly what you claim the “left” is going to do.

      Once again you spew absurd and wild generalizations. It is you indeed who is blaspheming this horrible day. Shame on you.

      • jim_m

        I asked a relevant question about culture and morality and you refused to engage in that. You could have proven me wrong by doing so, instead you proved me right by calling me names.

    • http://www.wizbangblog.com David Robertson

      When asked why God would allow such a thing to happen, he said ‘why do you ask that when we have been excluding God from our schools?’

      Leave it to Huckabee to add his pharisaic beliefs to the mix.

      • jim_m

        I think his broader point is valid. We exclude God and thus a concept of objective morality. Without such a concept there really isn’t any moral barrier to acts such as the one committed today. It isn’t about a Christian God or prayer in school per se. There are many faiths that inculcate a sense of moral truth. We won’t teach that because our schools are defacto atheist institutions.

        • retired.military

          I dont care for huckabee at all. I just wish he would go away.

          That being said I have to ask. If it is okay to kill millions of unborn children then how is something like this a suprise.

          What do you think the headlines would be if instead of those killed the killer would have killed say 30 unborn children while the mothers were left still alive. Would the left(ist politicians) raise a fuss about this? Would they even consider a crime to have been done?

        • http://www.wizbangblog.com David Robertson

          When did it become the job of public schools to teach children about God?

          Religious education is the domain of families and religious organizations.

          • arcman46

            You’re right David, it isn’t the job of the public schools to teach children about religion. It goes a lot deeper than “God not being allowed in school”, as Huckabee asserts. Cancer eats from the inside out. 40 years of Leftist thinking has destroyed the family structure. The black family structure, for example, because all liberals profess not to be as racists as we conservatives, have all but been destroyed completely by Leftist thinking, leaving millions of unwed mothers with fatherless babies. It’s a proven fact that children do better in school and life with 2 parents. It’s also a proven fact that there is less poverty associated with a 2 parent family structure. The news, the entertainment business, and the schools bombard these children with the message that it is OK to go out and have premarital sex. There are little to no consequences now, for a boy, to get a girl pregnant, because it’s easy to get an abortion, and the girl doesn’t even have to notify her parents that it’s happening. And even though no one really has come out and proven it, there are mental and physical consequences when that happens.

            This society is rotting from the inside out, and yes, it it the policies and politics of the Left that are mainly responsible.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            The schools in a lot of cases are not allowed to teach that there’s a ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ way to do things. It’s all neutral – there’s no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ way to look at any particular issue, any particular act. And the concept of discipline – either self-discipline or imposed by the school itself – is almost completely foreign to the teachings. .

            There’ve been enough lawsuits by parents who disagreed with the moral values taught by the schools or the discipline imposed that they’re really gun-shy about any sort of ethical teaching. (Heck, all you need are a few moderately high-profile cases nationwide, and suddenly the potential litigation costs are something no district wants to figure into the budget…)

            Add in that a lot of parents see the school as (still) being the source of moral and ethical teaching (because it was back in the day for them, despite it isn’t now) so THEY don’t need to do anything difficult like that, and you’re looking at a generation (possibly two, now) being raised who have a fair number of people in that haven’t been, to put it bluntly, civilized past the point of being housebroken and trained to bark on cue.

            But I’m sure it’ll all turn out okay in the long run.

          • jim_m

            I’m not talking about religious education. I’m talking about moral education. Did I not mention that the end game was teaching morality? Without God (or god as I said before) you have no basis for morality. In our schools we teach moral relativism exclusively. Right or wrong is entirely situational.

            I’m not asking for prayer in school. I’d just like them to teach that there really is a right and a wrong. It’s wrong to steal bread even when your family is starving, because now you have pushed the baker toward poverty. It’s wrong to push the 4th man out of the lifeboat when you only have supplies for 3. Today we just ask the student to have a good explanation for why he chose who he did. We teach children to have alibis not morals.

          • LiberalNightmare

            >>Religious education is the domain of families and religious organizations.

            Hows that workin out lately?

    • ackwired

      You are entirely correct that the gun is not the problem.

      Not only do we not teach our children morality, we teach them that violence is a solution. We do this with our video games, our movies, our TV shows, and the music that we play for them. During WWII the army had a problem getting recruits to shoot at the enemy. The psychologists determined that if simulated killing were repeated enough during training, the recruits would lose their resistance to pointing the weapon and pulling the trigger. Today we do the job for the army, and those who lack the stability to sort out which solution is appropriate in which situation are too often showing up on the news.

      We refuse to take responsibility for what our children are exposed to, and we are paying the price for it.

      • retired.military

        ackwired.

        I somewhat agree with you. The thing is the usual reaction is to treat millions of people based on the actions of a few.

        Whether discussing gun bans or banning video games.
        The vast majority of people are not gun toting maniacs. Nor will playing violent video games turn them into one.
        It is a sad fact that 99% of the laws are made for less than 1% of the people. The thing is that too many want to overly punish the 99% for the actions of the few instead of taking sane steps to address the actions of the 1%.
        I saw an article recently where a guy got life in jail on his 15th or so DUI conviction. Should it have taken 15 times to really realize that this guy was a menace to society when he got behind a wheel?

        .

        • ackwired

          We’re on the same page. I would not favor legislation against violent video games, movies, TV, or music, and I totally agree that in a free society it is essential that people take responsibility for their actions. If government were to do anything they could publicize the studies that reveal the psychological effects of simulated violence and try to inspire discussions about our culture valuing violence as a solution. I see no role for government beyond that.

  • http://www.wizbangblog.com David Robertson

    Doug needs to update his post, because the report about a missing girlfriend is false.

  • Carl

    Here’s the weapons this murderer used to kill 18 innocent American children.

    To claim that you’re “Pro-Life” and to at the same time defend access to these weapons is the height of right wing hypocrisy.

    Innocent children died. There is no reason Americans need access to assault rifles.

    • jim_m

      Rifle was reported to have been left in the car. Please inform us how a rifle that is available in the same caliber, but lacks the pistol grip and its otherwise identical, is somehow less deadly than the similar rifle in a different form factor?

      Or are you just another ignorant fool who thinks that putting a pistol grip on a rifle makes the same cartridge more lethal?

    • jim_m

      There is no reason for a mentally disturbed person to go untreated. I suppose the difference is that if a mentally disturbed person wants to kill a bunch of people and can’t get a gun they could still use a knife or better yet a bomb (unibomber anyone, another left wing loon that Carl doesn’t want to stop).

      Somehow you make the illogical leap that not addressing mental illness (despite growing evidence that it is the root cause of these events) but taking weapons from law abiding people is the solution. You make this assumption despite the fact that violent crime has been declining for the last 2 decades in the US and gun ownership and concealed carry have been growing. We have more guns and less crime.

      Your solution is that reducing guns will cause even less crime even though gun free areas like DC and Chicago have been hell holes of violent crime and murder for ages.

      Excuse me if I find that anyone who bothers to actually think about this issue will find your solution idiotic and rooted in ignorance and ideology rather than fact.

    • retired.military

      Carl
      To say that you are abhored at 18 innocent children dying by guns but have no problem with a million unborn children dying every year via abortion is the height of hypocracy. How much more innocent can you be than unborn.

      I have no problem with people who havent committed felonies owning MOST guns. If they commit crimes with them then I have no problem giving them the death sentence at trial either.

      The fact is that even without a gun this guy could have killed the same 18 children with a knife, with a bomb or poison made from easily available household materials, or from a fire. He could have driven a car down the street by the school either at the start or end of the day and taken out as many kids as he did with the guns.

      THe guns arent the problem. THe people wielding them are. If this guy had lived then the left would be wailing about his right to a fair trial and how he didnt have his meds so therefore he shouldnt be given the death penalty, yada yada yada. Look at the mess with Nidal Hassan. The Ft hood shootings were over 3 years ago and he still isnt even at trial. The latest big hold up was whether or not he could be forcibly shaven.
      THe left should hang its head in shame.

      BTW Carl. Did you know the left just stopped a law in Conn to prevent mentally ill folks who havent committed crimes to be institutalized against their will.

      • Carl

        Man Opens Fire In Alabama Hospital
        Just hours after a 20-year-old gun man killed 20 children and 6
        adults in an elementary school in Connecticut, authorities in Alabama
        “say a man opened fire in a hospital,
        wounding an officer and two employees before he was fatally shot by
        police.” The injuries are “not considered life-threatening”; the shooter
        was killed by police.

        http://bigstory.ap.org/article/police-gunman-wounds-3-alabama-hospital#overlay-context=article/rockets-fired-airport-pakistan-2-killed

        Conservatives don’t seem to care. They WHINE like babies about “union violence” yesterday – and then stand silent on the issue of sensible gun control. — or worse – they whine and complain that Obama wants to take their guns away.

        Nobody needs to own assault rifles.

        • jim_m

          Do you even know what an assault rifle is? Explain why they are more deadly than other rifles in similar calibers.

          On second thought your image answers the first question. You don’t know what an assault rifle is and implies that you do not know what the difference is between an assault rifle and other rifles of similar caliber.

          You’re making a fool of yourself.

          • Wild_Willie

            Jim, that is something Carl does every time. Basically he is saying ‘kill millions of unborn but be concerned about 18′. His math is terribly wrong. ww

        • retired.military

          Carl

          THere are many more guns in the US than cars. There are more car deaths in the US than gun deaths. I agree that certain weapons should not be in the hands of the general public due to their very nature. But answer me this. WHy should my gun rights be taken away. I have used firearms for 30+ years. I have 2 guns in my house which have never been fired at anything but a target and even then only twice in the past 2 years. I work on Ft Hood where 4 years after the Hasan shooting I sitll go to work and pass by soldiers carrying weapons down the street at least once a week. Weapons which can fire 3 round bursts and for which 30 round magazines and ammunition are readily available.
          I have played violent video games and where as I dont drink near as much as I used to I do drink occasionally.
          Yet I have endangered no one and many on the left want to take away my right to carry guns. These are the same folks who say that if an employer doesnt pay for health plans which have abortion in it then the employers are somehow limiting a woman’s right to an abortion.

    • 914

      There is a 180 degree difference between using weapons to defend life as opposed to arbitrarily deciding to take innocent life.

      For example: The 5o million that have ceased to exist because of access to this-

      http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosassorted/LateTermAbortions/abortedbaby25.html

  • Carl

    It takes balls to stand up to the gun lobby and the gun lovers and tell them they are wrong.

    Act. Join the Brady Campaign. http://www.bradycampaign.org/

    • jim_m

      Yes it takes balls to confiscate guns from law abiding people. It takes balls to use the power of the state to oppress the innocent. It takes real balls to do the same thing that Hitler and Castro did to render their populations helpless before their tyranny.

      However, it takes real balls to ignore the real problem.

      “The fact is, the facts are, as in Aurora, as in Arizona, as in Virginia Tech, as in virtually every case the Secret Service studied of these kinds of events… Every one of these episodes is proceeded by an undiagnosed, untreated, mental illness… Over the last 24 hours increasing information has come in from family members, from friends, from students, that Adam Lanza, as you have mentioned, was disturbed, was removed, was isolated.”

      • Carl

        And the whinning hypocrites chime in… waaaa – don’t confiscate our guns.

        We should change the law and prohibit the ownership of assault rifles. Enough innocent Americans have died — including these children.

        • jim_m

          Dumbass. It’s not the weapon it’s the culture. Take away guns and we will have nutballs like they do in China cutting up kids with edged weapons. The real solution is not using this as an excuse to leverage your ideological goal to oppress others, but to address what motivates people to do these things and (since mental illness seems to be the main driver) get them help.

          I find it funny to watch the rank hypocrisy of the left who run around claiming that minorities commit crimes because they are poor and uneducated and that we should not punish them but get them help, but when a crazy person commits mass murder the answer is not to get them help it is to use the tragedy to advance their fascist agenda.

        • jim_m

          Last report I heard was that the rifle was found in his car. Please explain how a weapon that wasn’t used in this crime contributed to the death toll and explain how banning such weapons will reduce the likelihood of a repeat.

          After all, we have evidence that banning guns works so well

          WINNENDEN, Germany— A teenage gunman killed 15 people, most of them female, on Wednesday in a rampage that began at a school near Stuttgart in southern Germany and ended in a nearby town, where he then killed himself after the police wounded him.

          The attack left Germany, which tightened tough gun controls after a similar attack at a school seven years ago, struggling to understand the carnage that had again befallen it, a country with relatively little violent crime. In 2002, a gunman killed 16 people before killing himself at a school in Erfurt, in eastern Germany.

          If a crazy person wants to kill a bunch of people access to guns will not be an obstacle. But by all means I encourage you to stand on he bodies of the dead and use them as props for your political agenda, you ghoul.

          • Carl

            I don’t have to explain a thing – you’re lying. He used the rifle to kill those innocent Americans.

            Explain why you have to lie about this and just about everything you comment on.

          • jim_m

            Last report I heard…

            That was true. Since then I have heard otherwise. There were many inaccurate media reports on this story. Come said that he had killed his father in NJ. SOme said that there was a missing girlfriend. Some said that his mother taught at the school. All of these have proven to be incorrect.

            SInce my comment I have had a lengthy discussion on another thread about rifles.

            I wasn’t lying but going on the best information I had and I couched it as what I had heard.

            Explain why you are such a stupid ideologue.

        • retired.military

          Money better spent would be to install panic buttons in every classroom directly linked to the cops.
          Funny how all these gun crimes happen in gun free zones. Every see anyone go on a mass shooting rampage at a gun range? in a gun store? One wonders why.

          • jim_m

            install panic buttons in every classroom directly linked to the cops.

            When seconds count the police are just minutes away.

          • retired.military

            True but in this case the teachers could have hit the panic button and cops would have been on the way while the lunatic was still in the office.

          • Carl

            One wonders why so many American are killed when in other countries around the world the gun/murder rate is so much lower.

            Americans do love their guns… and innocent Americans pay a dear price for their obsession.

            The early autopsy reports are in. Who among us is brave enough to talk down the gun nuts?

            Dr. Carver said that in the seven autopsies he himself had performed, the victims had from 3 to 11 wounds.

            With the examinations complete and the families informed, the
            authorities released the names of those killed. Among the children, there were 12 girls killed and 8 boys. All of the children were in the first grade, officials said. Sixteen of the 20 were 6 years old; the rest were 7. One little girl had just turned 7 on Tuesday.

            Who among us is willing to stand up and say “enough”…?

          • jim_m

            Yea, I ‘d much rather live in an oppressive country than here. Move if you think it’s that bad here.

            Of course the real issue is that by relying upon the government for everything we obviate the need for any real sense of community. Since we no longer give a crap about our neighbor it is so much easier to ignore when something is going wrong.

            It’s also interesting that you have ignored every comment about the collapse of the mental health system. Do you have no response to the fact that the 12 incidents this year are all tied to the mentally ill? Do you have no comment on how mentally disturbed people are ignored until they go off and murder a bunch of people?

            I find it more than cynical that you are all up in arms about guns but don’t give a rat’s ass about real people. Maybe if you gave a damn about the mentally ill getting help then these incidents wouldn’t happen in the first place.

            I posted from a German article on how they still have mass murder even though they have repressive gun laws. Maybe figuring out how to help disturbed people will be the right answer instead of advancig your political agenda.

          • Vagabond661

            I don’t understand how it could happen, Carl. It was a gun free zone. In fact all these shootings happen in gun free zones. The logical thing to do would be to eliminate gun free zones. They seem to attract the crazies.

          • herddog505

            Who amongst us is “brave” enough to deny his fellow citizens – who are law-abiding – their rights? Who amongst us is “brave” enough to demand that the police, if necessary, kick in doors to search the houses of their fellow Americans who have committed no crime? Who amongst us is “brave” enough to blame an inanimate object for the actions of lunatics?

            Let’s all give Carl a big, big round of applause for being “brave” enough to want to screw over millions of his fellow citizens, for being “brave” enough to climb up on this blood-soaked soapbox, for being “brave” enough to urge us to follow the path trodden by Hitler, Stalin, Castro, and all the other despots of history who like having an unarmed populace.

            Brave, brave Carl. What a hero, risking it ALL to stand up against the RKBA crowd, a group well-known for… um… er… well, they get irritated when people talk about denying them their rights, and you have to be really brave to irritate people.

        • retired.military

          WHy should my guns be confiscated. If I got drunk and drove my car and killed someone by your logic it would be okay for the govt to confiscate your car.

    • jim_m

      It takes balls to ignore the mounting mental health crisis in our country and place the blame on innocent people.

      (Dec. 14, 2012) ARLINGTON, VA – Friday’s mass shooting that left nearly 30 dead in Connecticut – including 20 young children – is one of nearly a dozen 2012 rampages involving assailants with suspected mental health issues. The year appears on track to end with more victims of rampage killings than any year before.

      “Our mental health system has completely failed individuals with severe mental illness and their communities,” said Doris A. Fuller, executive director. “We have emptied the nation’s hospitals, gutted state and local mental health programs, and turned involuntary treatment into a debate point instead of using it as a viable option to prevent tragedy involving those too ill to help themselves.”…

      Connecticut has an estimated 140,000 people with severe mental illness, of whom approximately one-half are untreated at any given time. It is one of only six states without a law authorizing court-ordered outpatient treatment for qualifying individuals with severe mental illness. Between 2005 and 2010, the state eliminated 17% of its public hospital beds, leaving it with only 43% of the number deemed minimally adequate to meet public needs, and has twice as many people with severe mental illness behind bars as in psychiatric hospital beds.

      But Carl knows that it isn’t a mental health problem in our country it is a gun problem. He knows this not because he has any facts to back him up. In fact he knows this only because his ideology informs him of this truth. The fact that there are probably close to 90 million legal gun owners in this country and the crime rate is in two decades of decline have no impact on his argument. His argument is one of religious faith in leftist ideology. Not founded in reality.

    • retired.military

      It takes balls to stand up to the proabortion crowd which is responsible for 50000 times more deaths of innocent children than this guy. Year in and year out.

    • Wild_Willie

      Let’s just say I am very much pro constitution. If we can ignore the 2nd amendment, let’s ignore the 1,3 and 5th as well. Once government has no fear of the citizens, they can move on any of the amendments. ww

  • SteveCrickmore075

    It is not only leftists, Rupert Murdoch apparently has had enough with his erstwhile allies, the wingnuts!

    Yesterday, the News Corp chairman used the social media platform Twitter to express frustration at the easy availability of automatic and semi-automatic guns in his adopted country.

    “Terrible news today,” he tweeted. “When will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons? As in Oz after similar tragedy.” the answer, not bloodly likely in America as they will be threatened for sure.
    Here is picture of the assault weapon (or a a very similar one) that was used, yes jim in the massacre, bought by his mother the kindergaten teacher.

    • jim_m

      “When will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons?

      Actually for idiots like you and Mr Murdoch the answer is that automatic weapons were banned in 1934 (I was waiting for some fool to post this stupid remark, which is so utterly ignorant about the facts.)

      It has long been illegal to buy an automatic weapon. Semiautomatic weapons are legal, but then so is a revolver and when it comes to handguns there really isn’t that much difference between the two.

      It’s a shame that lefties are too ignorant to bother to educate themselves on an issue that they claim is so important. But then maybe if they educated themselves they would find out that they are wrong.

      • SteveCrickmore075

        sure they were banned in 1934 but…The United States Supreme Court, in deciding the case of Haynes v. United States in favor of the defendant, effectively gutted the National Firearms Act of 1934. As one could possess an NFA firearm and choose not to register it, and not face prosecution due to Fifth Amendment protections, the Act was unenforceable. Compliance

        The National Rifle Association has referred to the features affected by the ban as cosmetic, as has the Violence Policy Center.

        In addition, in March 2004, Kristen Rand, the legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, criticized the soon-to-expire ban by stating, “The 1994 law in theory banned AK-47s, MAC-10s, Uzis, AR-15s and other ‘assault weapons’. Yet the gun industry easily found ways around the law and most of these weapons are now sold in post-ban models virtually identical to the guns Congress sought to ban in 1994.”

        So I guess the National Rifle Association as well as Rupert Murdoch and Sharron Engle have become lefties too which seems to be your ultimate insult.

        • jim_m

          It’s enforceable in that as a convicted felon Haynes could not legally own a firearm. They tried him for failure to register the weapon. The court ruled that registration would have violated his rights against self incrimination.

          They can’t get him for failure to register and that is all. His possession of the weapon was still illegal and they could try him for that.

          I defy you to go anywhere and find a fully auto weapon for sale to the general public. You can’t find them.

          So not only does Steve believes that we should get rid of the 2nd amendment but he has just come out against the 5th.

          Any other parts of our constitution that you think we should get rid of because they are preventing imposition of the dictatorship you so deeply desire?

          • SteveCrickmore075

            maybe online or at gun shows. I’m not an expert, thank heaven..where did that woman get it (the police said it was legally registered to her) the medical examiner: CT medical examiner: The rifle was the primary weapon. which according to authorities was a Bushmaster 233 caliber assault rifle
            30 magazine, designed for military and law enforcement use, and why are they so publicly displayed on the the smith and wesson site, with details how to purchase and buy them..see my previous link.

          • jim_m

            She did not have any automatic weapons and THAT is the point. You are so ignorant about guns that you think that the appearance of a gun means that the gun is more deadly.

            It’s like looking at a sports car and determining the top speed by looking at the body work. You haven’t looked at the engine so you really have no idea of how fast it could go.

            This rifle fires the same ammunition as the rifle used in Connecticut and is also semiautomatic. So you should want to ban this too. But you don’t. To your ignorant eyes it is somehow safer because it has a wood stock and no pistol grip.

            Semiautomatic just means that after you pull the trigger the next round is loaded into the chamber. This is the way many rifles work. This is the way nearly all handguns work. You still have to pull the trigger every round to fire the weapon. Automatic means that the gun keeps firing until you release the trigger or until you run out of ammunition.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            It was Murdoch who spoke of a ban of automatic and semi automatic guns.. The principal firearm used in the massacre was an assault rifle or an assault weapon ( either or, and this is an important catergory or distinctions of guns that were effectively banned by Congress for ten years, until the law expired in 2004. Why the kindergarten teacher felt she needed an assault rifle or an assault weapon, when she had several other guns, is beyond me?

          • jim_m

            Murdoch spoke out of ignorance. People who repeat his comment do so as well.

            My point above is that the ban was artificial and did not really do anything. You could not buy a gun with a pistol grip, but you could buy one without and get an accessory pistol grip anyway. You could still buy the same caliber rifles anyway. The ban was window dressing and little more than an excuse to ban guns for the sake of banning them. It did nothing to reduce crime. It removed no illegal weapons from the street. It only reduced the options that law abiding citizens had to defend themselves or for hunting (yes people can use the .223 caliber for hunting).

            Violent crime did not rise with the expiration of the ban. so the ban didn’t suppress violent crime (funny how somehow the criminals were not following the law apparently).

          • CaptainNed

            And let’s not even bring up the fact that every single deer rifle carried into the woods all over the USA fires a cartridge at least twice as powerful as the .223 Rem. No, that “black rifle” look suddenly makes the cartridge five times more powerful.

            Useful idiots.

          • jim_m

            Actually the .223 (not .233) caliber is considered a sporting round and the similar size 5.56 NATO round, which has more power is used for military and law enforcement. Same size bullet, more powder in the cartridge with the 5.56. You could fire a .223 cartridge in a 5.56 rifle but doing the opposite is dangerous.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            “maybe online or at gun shows. I’m not an expert, thank heaven.”

            Why not? It’s not rocket science, it’s not even algebra.

            There’s three types of firearms, broadly speaking.

            You’ve got revolvers. Six shots (possibly 5 or 8, depending on the manufacturer and caliber.) and you have to swing out the cylinder and reload. Pull trigger, bang, pull trigger and bang, until *click*.

            You’ve got semi-automatic handguns and rifles. You put in your magazine, pull the trigger, and *bang*. Pull trigger, and bang. Clip size ranges from 8 to 15 or so, or more depending on manufacturer and caliber. Note the ‘semi’ – automatic. You still have to pull the trigger.

            Then you’ve got fully automatic handguns and rifles. Very few handguns, even fewer rifles are manufactured as full-auto, because (A) recoil means that they’re inaccurate as hell, and (2) they’re damned expensive and eat ammo like popcorn. (You start paying $3 to $5 for .50 cal per round, the cost goes up real fast for a full-auto machine gun. Something like 9mm goes for about 25 cents a round, but there’s not many fully automatic weapons using that round. You can find .223 for about 35 cents a round.) They’ll go “bang-bang-bang” as long as you’ve got the trigger pulled.

            So there you go. The difference between revolvers, semi-auto firearms and fully auto, explained.

            Now, referring to a semi-auto firearm as an ‘automatic’ is a convenience – so you need to pay attention. There’s very few fully automatic pistols – and those are usually dating back to WW2 or earlier. (And even then, they had the same problems – accuracy and cost of ammo. Besides, when you’ve only got 15-20 rounds you don’t want to hold down the trigger and see most of them hit the ceiling.)

            Hope this helps clear things up for you. That wasn’t hard, was it? Not rocket science, or algebra, barely multiplication!

    • retired.military

      “Twitter to express frustration at the easy availability of automatic and semi-automatic guns in his adopted country.”

      Vs the easy access to abortion in this country.

      18 kids get shot is a tragedy.
      a million unborn babies die a year in abortion clinics is a statistic.

      • Carl

        Some pro-lifers are such hypocrites.

        They care about “life” until… you know, they’re actually born – then they could care less.

        Each of these children was shot multiple times – and all you can do is change the subject to deflect the disregard you have for the lives of these innocent children – and the many other Americans who die as the result of unfettered “gun ownership”… ? How sad.

        • jim_m

          You don’t give a damn about anyone. You only care about your agenda. How about the half a million mental patients that aren’t getting proper care? You don’t give a damn about them. Your solution is to ban guns so maybe we can continue to ignore the reason they commit these acts in the first place.

          Fool. As if a person in their right mind would do this just because a gun was laying around. These people need help. Until the left actually starts caring about people instead of their agenda they will continue to hurt others regardless of what weapons are available.

        • retired.military

          Carl

          I have great regard for the lives of those innocent children. Born and unborn. Going by your statements you can only say half that statement. What difference does it make to you if they are unborn. Dead is dead. At least I have issues with both born and unborn children being killed.

  • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

    Just to muddy the waters somewhat…

    http://gizmodo.com/5927379/the-secret-online-weapons-store-thatll-sell-anyone-anything

    You can buy pretty much anything on-line using bitcoins. Illegal, of course. And expensive.

    A semi-auto, 9mm Beretta 92FS with “No scratches or dents, very slight wear from extremely light usage” would hit me for 338.69bitcoins. At the current Bitcoin/Dollar exchange of roughly 9-to-1, that’s a little over $3,000. A stiff markup.

    Looks like you can buy one on-line for as little as $550.

    http://www.gunsamerica.com/Search/Category/77/2/Guns/Pistols/Beretta-Pistols/Model-92-series.htm

    Of course, then you’ve got to go through all those pesky background checks, have it shipped to a FFL gunshop for pickup and all that… Far better to spend 6 times more, right?

    Now, as far as actual full-auto machine guns go – you can get pretty much anything you want… but there’s going to be one hell of a markup. And I wouldn’t be at all surprised if 3/4ths of the sellers of such weren’t ATF agents, and half the buyers, also.

  • jim_m

    For all the lefty ideologues standing on the corpses of the victims in order to advance their ideological agenda (that means you Carl): There has been no statistical increase in the frequency of mass killings in the United States

    And yet those who study mass shootings say they are not becoming more common.

    “There is no pattern, there is no increase,” says criminologist James Allen Fox of Boston’s Northeastern University, who has been studying the subject since the 1980s, spurred by a rash of mass shootings in post offices.

    The random mass shootings that get the most media attention are the rarest, Fox says. Most people who die of bullet wounds knew the identity of their killer…

    Grant Duwe, a criminologist with the Minnesota Department of Corrections who has written a history of mass murders in America, said that while mass shootings rose between the 1960s and the 1990s, they actually dropped in the 2000s. And mass killings actually reached their peak in 1929, according to his data. He estimates that there were 32 in the 1980s, 42 in the 1990s and 26 in the first decade of the century.

    Chances of being killed in a mass shooting, he says, are probably no greater than being struck by lightning.

    When the left starts gettting excited about lightning strikes I will deem them to be serious about gun control for the sake of those who get killed in mass shootings like the one this week.