Connecticut Shooting: Shattered Tranquility

As people continue to debate the circumstances surrounding the tragedy that took place in Newtown, Connecticut, I want to take a step back and examine how people are responding to it.

We humans want to live in a world that is safe, tranquil and predictable. So, when a tragedy such as the one in Connecticut takes place, we are appalled in part because our tranquility has been shattered and our sense of security has been disrupted.

Although we grieve for the victims of such a tragedy, we are not emotionally satisfied with just grieving. We want our sense of security to be restored, and often we insist that someone pay a price for the loss that we have experienced.

So, how do we react when the party responsible for the loss is dead?

Well, you can’t punish a dead person. You can’t take your anger out on a dead person. So, who or what do you take your anger out on?

In discussion threads pertaining to the Connecticut shooting, some people are venting their anger by blaming prescription drugs for the actions of Adam Lanza.  Yet (at the time of this writing), there is no evidence that Lanza had been using prescription medication. Thus, the complaint about prescription drugs is premature at best.

The assumption of drug use on the part of Adam Lanza is due to a belief that Lanza was mentally ill. It has been reported that Lanza had Asperger’s syndrome, which, according to Dr. Manny Alvarez, is a mild form of autism. However, a person having autism isn’t the same thing as a person having a mental illness that makes the person dangerous to self and others. Thus far, nothing in Lanza’s background indicates that he was a danger to himself or others.

In short, there were no red flags pertaining to Lanza that would have made people think that he was prone to commit an act of violence.

That lack of red flags makes some people feel uneasy. Red flags indicate predictability, and people want to live in a predictable world. A lack of red flags means a lack of predictability, and people can have difficulty coping with a lack of predictability.

Aside from Adam Lanza’s mental health, some people are focusing on Lanza’s ability to get hold of firearms. The reaction of some people is to demand more gun-control legislation, as if more regulation could have prevented Lanza from committing his crime. As it turns out, Lanza used firearms that were owned by his mother, and thus far, there is no evidence that the mother did anything wrong in acquiring the firearms that she had. Also, thus far, nobody has offered evidence that any new gun law would have prevented Lanza from doing what he did.

Then there are the complaints about a perceived lack of security at Sandy Hook Elementary School.  As it turns out, Lanza didn’t just waltz into the school and start shooting.  Instead, he forced his way passed the security measure that existed at the school.

So, looking at the facts known thus far, it appears to me that plenty of knee-jerk reactions have taken place in response to the Connecticut tragedy.

Human beings are good at responding to known threats. Humans can figure out how to minimize – if not completely eliminate – known threats. The unknown threats are the ones that challenge our coping abilities. If we know about a threat, then we don’t necessarily feel helpless because we believe that a solution to the threat can be discovered.

It is the unknown threat that really scares us. While discussing the Connecticut tragedy, media personality Juan Williams proclaimed that something must be done.  But what can be done to prevent an unknown threat, as Adam Lanza was?  When interviewed, people who knew Lanza and his mother said the same thing, that nothing about Adam Lanza made them believe that he was capable of an act of violence.

In an attempt to restore the tranquility that was shattered, people will continue to debate the details of Adam Lanza’s life, will (I predict) continue to assign blame to parties that are not to blame for what happened. However, I do not see tranquility being restored until people face up to a harsh piece of reality: Evil happens. As the late psychiatrist M. Scott Peck reveals in his book People of the Lie, evil is as real as the bullets that took the lives of Adam Lanza’s victims. It cannot be diagnosed away or legislated away, and it can defeat the best-laid plans of people.

Am I saying that Adam Lanza himself was evil?  No. Am I saying that what he did was evil?  Yes. Evil existed long before the invention of firearms and prescription medication, and evil will exist even if those inventions of mankind were to cease to exist. Acknowledging evil’s existence helps me to cope with it whenever it appears, and I certainly do not rely on anything man-made to be the ultimate antidote for evil. Some things are just beyond the capacity of mankind.

For me, restoration of tranquility comes from a source that atheists deny the existence of, the same source that brought tranquility back into my life after my wife died from medical complications pertaining to cancer.  Churches in Newtown, Connecticut are now full of people seeking tranquility from the same source.

What source are you seeking tranquility from?

 

Shortlink:

Posted by on December 18, 2012.
Filed under Breaking News, Evil, News.
Tagged with: .
A refugee from Planet Melmac masquerading as a human. Loves cats*. In fair condition. A fixer-upper. Warranty still good. Not necessarily sane.[*Joke in reference to the TV sit-com "Alf", which featured a space alien who liked to eat cats. Disclaimer: No cats were harmed in the writing and posting of this profile.]

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • Carl

    You really needn’t blame the school or drugs or his aspergers – mental health experts have already discounted mental illness as a factor in these killings, based on what’s known about the shooter’s condition.

    No, all you have to do is look at the one individual who enabled this heinous tragedy – and who, ironically, died from her own zealous actions and her own immersion in the gun lovers culture.

    Another factor that will make it hard for the NRA to play the culture war card is that it appears Adam Lanza’s mother purchased so many assault weapons to protect herself from an apocalyptic breakdown of civil society after an economic collapse that she feared was coming.

    “Last time we visited with her in person we talked about
    prepping and you know, are you ready for what can happen down the line
    when the economy collapses,” said the gunman’s aunt, Marsha Lanza.

    The reporter asked, “Survivalist kind of thing?”

    “Yea,” said Marsha Lanza.

    A survivalist gun nut killed with her own 30 clip assault rifle. The irony, so sweet.

    How’s that whole “survival” thing working out for her so far? And why did she have to take down innocent children with her?

    • Hawk_TX

      “The irony, so sweet.”
      YOU ARE A VERY SICK PERSON.

      She did not take down any innocent children she was a victim the same as the children. She did not break any laws and she did not harm anybody. She was robbed and murdered and you are blaming her.

      • Carl

        Don’t change the context. That’s Jim’s dishonest trick.

        A survivalist gun nut killed with her own 30 clip assault rifle. The irony, so sweet.

        She apparently wasn’t very good at that whole “survival” business. She left her assault rifle accessible by her own children, which ultimately killed her and contributed to the death of 18 kindergartners.

        • jim_m

          Gee Carl, it’s almost like you are happy that 20 children were slaughtered so you can advance your agenda.

          No seriously. You really do sound like you are happy about this.

          • Carl

            No really, you are a lying idiot. No, really…

          • jim_m

            Too bad for you that everyone else seems to agree with me that you appear to be enjoying these deaths a little too much.

        • Vagabond661

          She taught her son to shoot guns from what I have read. She was preparing a place for her and her son to survive when the whole thing went south. I think he knew that.

          Then why would he kill his mom? What was the trigger? What pushed him over the cliff? If he didn’t have a gun he would have used something else because he was too far gone. The blanket request by low mentality people is to ban guns. That is not what is at hand here. There are millions of guns out there and before any ban would go into effect there would be MANY more millions of guns bought. Banning them is ridiculous. Blaming the mom is stupid.

          The best way to stop this from happening is an armed society. Period.

          • Carl

            She taught him how to kill. And she succeeded. A survivalist’s twisted insanity comes back to bite her.

            “The best way to stop this from happening is an armed society. Period.”

            That’s just plain more insanity.

          • Vagabond661

            She taught him how to shoot a gun for protection. He used it to kill. I’ll bet you sucked at reading comprehension, didn’t you chuckles?

            And since all statistics support a lower crime rate in areas with guns that also means you ain’t very smart either.

    • 914

      SICKO

  • SteveCrickmore075

    On this site, the majority opinion is, everything is to blame for gun deaths,….. except guns!

    • herddog505

      Yep. Common sense (I know, I know…) doesn’t hold an inert mass of metal and plastic (or wood) responsible for a crime.

      Or are you lefties into demonic possession now?

    • herddog505

      No, I’d say that the fairly uniform opinion of all but you and Carl is that Ryan Lanza, a lunatic, is to blame, though jim_m has said quite a lot about our mental health system. You, on the other hand, have been busy blaming an inanimate object and / or Lanza’s mother’s personal philosophy. As for Carl… meh. He’s just a garden-variety sicko who seems to delight in these deaths as it gives him a chance to score (I suppose) political points.

    • jim_m

      You claim to be for gun control but where have you been the last 4 years as obama has dropped gun law prosecutions by 40%? Where were you on the gunwalker scandal?

      Your cynical aims are showing. This isn’t about guns or safety, otherwise those would have been issues to you. This is about political control.

      • SteveCrickmore075

        i have been writing that Obama has been ducking the issue, of gun control for some time, the NRA has nothing to fear from the Obama administration up until Sandy Hook. Even now he is slow walking gun control. This is not Australia but here is what might happen if we really wanted it to, yes yes apart from the 2nd amendment, but since your are always comparing the lack of success when other countries have tried gun control.

        On April 28, 1996, a gunman opened fire on tourists in a seaside resort in Port Arthur, Tasmania. By the time he was finished, he had killed 35 people and wounded 23 more. It was the worst mass murder in Australia’s history.

        Twelve days later, Australia’s government did something remarkable. Led by newly elected conservative Prime Minister John Howard, it announced a bipartisan deal with state and local governments to enact sweeping gun-control measures. A decade and a half hence, the results of these policy changes are clear: They worked really, really well.

        Even impressed News Corp Rupert Murdoch, but Fox News can not talk about it pro or con!

        The ATF Gunwalker scandal is awful, but it really took off and got its impetus, as you know as Operation Wide Receiver in 2006-2008.

        • jim_m

          The nice thing about anecdotal evidence is that anyone can do it.

          Statistically speaking mass shootings have not increased. Statistically, the CDC was unable to demonstrate any difference in gun related violence during the years of the Clinton assault weapons ban.

          The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the “assault weapon” ban and other gun control attempts, and found “insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.” A 2004 critical review of research on firearms by a National Research Council panel also noted that academic studies of the assault weapon ban “did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence” and noted “due to the fact that the relative rarity with which the banned guns were used in crime before the ban … the maximum potential effect of the ban on gun violence outcomes would be very small….”

          Show me something meaningful and not just something dramatic meant to stir me emotionally but which has no relation to what really works.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            It is not just anecdotal,The Harvard study, the Australian Gun Buy Back concluded compelling evidence for the success of the ban homicides, suicides armed robberies way down,,,and for the previous 18 years before the rapid fire ban there were 13 gun massacres, what the police define as a massacre four or more victims, since the ban in 1996 for the last 16 years there hasn’t been a single one.

            The Clinton ‘assault ban’ was halfhearted , the relative few guns returned in their buyback program were voluntary…Further, the reason that gun homicides are falling in the USA as gunshot injuries increase, is because of much better and faster medical treatment and response according to a Wall Street Journal article which I have linked to earlier.. It is not because we are becoining less violent.

          • jim_m

            They also point out that other studies claim that the NFA did not have an appreciable result. They further claim that this is evidence that a total ban would work in the US, however gun ownership in Australia and violent crime were already significantly lower than in the US. Gun ownership was already highly restricted so the number of guns was rather small to begin with.

            The authors admit that “For Australia, a difficulty with determining the effect of the law was that gun deaths were falling in the early 1990s.” but deny that gun deaths would have continued to fall because they can’t find a study they like that explains why those rates were falling. In other words, the effect of the NFA may have been negligible but they choose to ignore evidence of that possibility.

            Lastly, it is another country and another culture. I just showed you studies where 1) mass shootings here in the US are not increasing but either stable or declining and 2) the assault weapons ban had no effect here in the US.

            Your answer is that we should do it again and presumably make it more harsh on law abiding people so therefore we will maybe have an effect.

            Once again we see that leftism never fails it just isn’t tried hard enough.

        • jim_m

          Operation Wide Receiver was cancelled by the Bush admin when they found it too difficult to trace the weapons once they crossed the border. With Fast & Furious there was no attempt to trace the weapons. The Mexican government was not made aware of the operation. Claiming that one was the genesis of the other is an outright lie. Anyone who has bothered to follow the scandal would know that and if this were the case there would not have been a need for the cover up.

    • Conservachef

      Good grief you can say some stupid stuff.

      I think we’re all blaming the crazed killer for killing the people. Not the tool he used.

      • SteveCrickmore075

        I’m blaming his access to ´the tool’, if he were mentally ill which seems self evident and far earlier than last week.. Everyone including his mother recognized it. You shouldn’t allow a young person with temper problems, who burns his own arms and legs with cigarette lighters, who has absloutely no empathy with other humans, to target practice with a rapid fire Bushmaster? Why were he and his mother so infatuated with guns? To the collecter or enthusiast they are more than tools! And most of you don’t seem to grasp the effect changing technology has on us, it can change the way we think, even wire our brains. or interact. Men couldn’t read to themselves before the Guttenburg press, They had to read outloud.The effect of having command of a this rapid fire killing machine, of this tool, had on the mind of someone who had never felt physical pain before..well..mn

        • herddog505

          Good grief, you really ARE blaming an inanimate object!

          • SteveCrickmore075

            some inanimate objects are dangerous! Should private citizens be allowed to carry around concealed nukes in suitcase, that could be thought to be a concealed arm –one you carry?

          • 914

            So are automobiles. You want to ban those to?

          • herddog505

            Dangerous to whom? I could load a 50-cal machinegun, jack a round into the chamber, and it would sit on its tripod, totally inert, for decades without doing anyone or anything a bit of harm.

            In contrast, a loony with box cutter is dangerous.

            See the difference?

          • SteveCrickmore075

            Yes i see your point, but in consequence we don’t allow even scissors in carry on luggage so a young nutjob should not have been encouraged to target pratice with a Bushmaster assault rifle. as part of his therapy to help him ‘ bond’ with his mother. She had been enthusistically teaching him to shoot for ten years, since he was ten when he was disturbed even then. In another time culture, someone might have said this may not be a good idea. ‘You guys’ are certainly more knowledgeable about guns than I am, don’t you ever wonder about some of the people that you meet who seem to be gun devotees and don’t seem so let’s say balanced with a bad temper, but don’t have a record or are not certified as mentally ill?

          • Carl

            Spot on – a child who is known to have severe mental issues – and his survivalist gun-loving mother immerses him in the gun culture she loves so much.

            Autopsy reports have pointed out the accuracy with which he shot his victims. I bet his prowess with a gun made his mother proud….

          • herddog505

            1. Scissors on airplanes – one stupid, pointless policy really ought not serve as a precedent for another stupid, pointless policy, don’t you think?

            2. Teaching young Adam to shoot – well, I’m fairly sure that, had his mother possessed a crystal ball that would have enabled her to look ten years into the future and know that her son was going to go totally nutso and kill her and other people, NOT teaching him to shoot would have been on her “To Do” list. Along with having him locked up or, at least, seen by every specialist she could get her hands on.

            Unfortunately, Mrs. Lanza, in common with the rest of us, DIDN’T have a crystal ball and no more knew that she was making a mistake than the guy who gets killed in a car wreck because he didn’t stay home.

            And do you tell us that Lanza was shooting for TEN YEARS? That’s ten years of (I assume) relatively normal behavior, ten years where we must presume his mother saw no warning signs. Did something change?

            At this point, we don’t know many details other than this guy went nuts and killed a number of people, including himself.

            Not a good foundation on which to build public policy, I’d say. Or do you want a repeat of the Patriot Act, TSA, and the other f*ck-ups we had in the wake of 9-11 when too many people were demanding action, action that feckless, witless politicians were only too happy to provide?

            As for “wondering” about people… Yeah, I wonder about other people all the time. I go through life with the certain knowledge that half of the population is of below average intelligence; that many people are (by my standards) thoughtless, mean and cruel; that there are out-and-out psychos out there, people who would think no more of robbing or killing me than I would think of stepping on an ant. I do what I can to protect myself from them: lock my doors at night, avoid dark alleys, stay away from places where bad people hang out, keep a gun in the house, etc. But what I DON’T do is try to have people’s rights curtailed because of what I THINK they MIGHT do. Call it a weakness of mine for due process, presumption of innocence, and the rule of law.

            Otherwise, I might be for things like banning certain books or political parties, keeping people who “look” Muslim off planes, having the cops roust young black men (as was common in the not-so-distant past), etc., etc. There’s really no end to the injustices that one can do when he’s motivated by mindless fear; the sad thing is, he is totally justified in his own mind.

            And one final note: CCW holders (nasty ol’ gunowners, you know) are about as close as you’ll find to certified NON-violent offenders. States and counties tend to be pretty careful about passing out those licences; here in No. Carolina, the laws require:

            (1)The applicant is a citizen of the United States and has been a resident of the State 30 days or longer immediately preceding the filing of the application.

            (2) The applicant is 21 years of age or older.

            (3) The applicant does not suffer from a physical or mental infirmity that prevents the safe handling of a handgun.

            (4) The applicant has successfully completed an approved firearms safety and training course which involves the actual firing of handguns and instruction in the laws of this State governing the carrying of a concealed handgun and the use of deadly force….

            The list of things that will cause the sheriff to deny a permit is lengthy and is about what one would expect: ineligible to own a firearm under other state or federal law; under indictment for or guilty of a felony; dishonorable discharge from the armed services; drug user; fugitive from justice; etc.

            http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-415.12.html
            This is the sort of law that lefties seem to think doesn’t exist.
            What more do you want?

        • Conservachef

          Look, Steve. Nancy had legally obtained firearms. Perhaps her only mistake was in not securing them better from her troubled son. You want to (rationally) discuss the ups-and-downs of troubled teens and psychology, mental-health issues, that’s fine. Drop the gun issue and address the root cause of this tragedy. I think that that’s the discussion that should be happening.

          To the collector or enthusiast guns are still tools, devices with a purpose and history- just like knives or samurai swords or corvettes. Interesting tools, but tools nonetheless. Furthermore, they are tools that are Constitutionally protected.

          What on earth do you mean about reading out loud? The printing press suddenly allowed mankind to think the words they were reading instead of speaking them? Honestly, I don’t understand your point with that.

          You keep blaming the gun. I’ll keep blaming the killer.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            It is a point Marshall McCluhan makes repeatably; technology changes our neurons in our brains wiring.Until Guttenburg human beings couldn’t read silently, something you take for granted now.. Of course, i blame the killer for actions even if it could have been proved he was insane-. Maybe you missed this before but i will paste what one of America’s top expert on violence, Mark Kleiman said about homicides and gun homicides in the wake of Sandy Hook.

            “Sandy Hook reminds us that we have about five times the murder rate of any
            other advanced country, and that most but not all of the difference is guns, and
            in particular concealable guns. That’s partly because a bullet wound is
            statistically more lethal than a knife wound (and more likely to inflict
            permanent serious injury even if the victim survives) and partly because a gun
            is the perfect wimp’s weapon, requiring no strength, skill, or physical courage
            and allowing both physical distance and psychological disconnect between killer
            and victim. (Some of the gangbangers now locked up for drive-bys turn out to be
            incapable of defending themselves in prison fistfights.)”

            It is not we have five times more the number of crazies ,per capita as any other western country, it’s that we have so many guns!.

          • Conservachef

            I find it amazing that mankind couldn’t read silently until the printing press. Please prove it.

            I read your quote before, and I like the response it got there. How about this one- God created men, Sam Colt made them equal?

            Calling guns “the perfect wimp’s weapon” is a load of BS. Tell that to a woman who used her “wimp’s weapon” to defend herself from a rapist.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            There’s a reason it was called ‘The Equalizer’.

            http://munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/why-the-gun-is-civilization/

          • Carl

            There’s a reason they’re called “gun nuts”

          • jim_m

            And while it requires little skill to pull a trigger it does require a modicum of skill to actually hit the target.

            Also, Steve does not tell us how many of those guns are owned legally and how many are owned illegally. He does not reference the fact that gun violence is on the decline in the US and gun ownership is increasing.

            According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from -

            a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%

            a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%

            family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%

            So 80% of guns used in crime are taken illegally. No one on the left wants to confront the fact that gun laws don’t work with criminals or that the assault weapons ban had no effect on crime.

          • Conservachef

            I guess it eventually boils down to your outlook on weapons. It appears that Steve (and others) look at guns and see the potential dangers. Others (like myself) look at guns and see the potential benefits-alongside the dangers. I understand the dangers, and I know that better education and training go a long way to minimizing those dangers, and allow me to appreciate the benefits more.

            I don’t know how to get him/them past the potential hazards outlook.

        • jim_m

          Wow, Adam Lanza never felt physical pain. You know this how? Now you are just making up BS.

          The rifle in question was no more rapid fire than any other semiautomatic rifle. You once again display your absolute ignorance about guns. And you expect that because you are completely ignorant that your views should prevail. You think that we should pass laws based in ignorance and hysteria because it makes you feel good. You are a fool and a dangerous one at that.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            I read several accounts that he could feel no pain, from students, family and a teacher which is why is industrial arts/tech teacher was so concerned abou him, soldering and so on If you want a link I will find it http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/15/adam-lanza-was-a-loner-who-didnt-feel-pain-either-physically-or-emotionally-says-former-teacher/

          • jim_m

            There is actually a medical condition where people really do feel no pain. This is exceedingly rare. There is no evidence that Lanza was one of these people (and a teacher’s anecdote is not evidence. We need a diagnosis otherwise what we have is merely more indication of mental instability).

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            I wonder about synesthesia – could his brain have gotten miswired enough so that he was feeling pain as pleasure?

            Far-fetched, to be sure.

          • jim_m

            There is actually a medical condition where people really do feel no pain. This is exceedingly rare. There is no evidence that Lanza was one of these people (and a teacher’s anecdote is not evidence. We need a diagnosis otherwise what we have is merely more indication of mental instability).

          • Carl

            I’ve read the same thing. Jim’s lying again.

            The young man who killed 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school Friday suffered from a condition where he could literally feel no pain, according to a faculty member at his old high school.

            Richard Novia, the advisor for the tech club at Newton High, said that if Adam Lanza cut or hurt himself, “he would not know it or feel it.”

            And Jim also lied when he claimed that an assault rifle wasn’t used in he killings, but that only pistols were used.

            “Police said Lanza used a Bushmaster semiautomatic assault-style rifle to kill the children before using a handgun to take his own life. Officials said the guns were likely legally purchased by Nancy.

            http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/newtown-shooting-gunman-feel-pain/story?id=17996682#.UNC81LYzK2w

          • jim_m

            Listen asshole. There were media reports that the rifle was left in the car OK?

            Also, Steve cited a teacher saying that he felt no pain. I posted an article about a medical condition and said that unless we had an actual diagnosis I wasn’t inclined to believe it. So FUCK YOU.

            There are no lies here only your being a prick.

          • Carl

            So with all of the reports that he used the rifle — in fact EVERY ONE of the reports I’ve seen – you choose to believe the one report that was wrong and to claim others were lying when they point out that he used an assault rifle and not just hand guns?

            What a narrow minded ass. But feel free to provide a link to the “media reports (plural) that the rifle was left in the car”. Wow, did “media reports” really say that or is this just another one of Jim’s lies?

            waiting….

          • jim_m

            No, Once the report was made conclusively that he used the rifle I did believe that. I made one comment early on referring to a report that said he left the rifle in the car.

            You however are still an ass. I dare you to answer RM’s questions honestly and to post links to data backing up your assertions. You are such a loser you probably won’t take the challenge.

          • Carl

            Well, looks like I have to ask again. Show us a link to the “report” you saw…. or are you just lying again?

            still waiting… “media reports” – links, now.

          • jim_m

            Fuck you. Everyone knows that there were multiple reporting errors that first day. I accepted the changed report once I saw it. Plus you won’t find an erroneous report still on a news site they would have removed it or corrected it.

          • Carl

            still waiting….

          • SteveCrickmore075

            I read several accounts that he could feel no pain, from students, family and a teacher which is why is industrial arts/tech teacher was so concerned abou him, soldering and so on If you want a link I will find it http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/15/adam-lanza-was-a-loner-who-didnt-feel-pain-either-physically-or-emotionally-says-former-teacher/

    • Vagabond661

      That’s like blaming an SUV for a traffic accident.

    • jim_m

      Since you are so convinced that the assault weapons ban would have prevented this you should know that Connecticut already has an assault weapons ban and the rifle used was in compliance with it and would have been in compliance with the old federal ban as well.

      These laws you think are so helpful are just window dressing. They don’t solve the problem they just paper over it.

      • SteveCrickmore075

        I’m not advocating necessarily more laws …that is tricky, second amendment reasons and so forth, but pointing out the societal problems and that there needs to be a change in attitude like this woman below has shown, not only on mental health..
        Why Did Nancy Lanza Love Guns?
        Probably for the same reasons I did. Until now.

        • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

          Why the Gun is Civilization

          http://munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/why-the-gun-is-civilization/

          Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

          In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

          When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

      • SteveCrickmore075

        I’m not advocating necessarily more laws …that is tricky, second amendment reasons and so forth, but pointing out the societal problems and that there needs to be a change in attitude like this woman below has shown, not only on mental health..
        Why Did Nancy Lanza Love Guns?
        Probably for the same reasons I did. Until now.

  • SteveCrickmore075

    And about tranquility, I’m not looking for tranquility; about the only people who have real tranquility, after this horrific event, are the little children who died, but I don’t think it is doing them much good..or bad. Sorry, if that isn’t more comforting! The tragic sense of it is, we really can’t fix the problem seriously without removing or amending the second amendment, so we must continue to endure gun massacres by sociopaths, as a signature fact of American life, for a long time. This weekend was a start though, the cynical NRA closed its Facebook page and are in hiding .

    • jim_m

      NRA closed its Facebook page

      Probably because of all your peaceful lefty friends sending them death threats.

    • http://twitter.com/jinx_mchue Severe Conservative

      “This weekend was a start though, the cynical NRA closed its Facebook page and are in hiding .”

      And yet, they are still on Twitter:

      https://twitter.com/NRA

      Google+:

      https://plus.google.com/100742073996741176603/posts

      And YouTube:

      http://www.youtube.com/user/NRAVideos

      So much for “they’re in hiding.” Moron.

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        No tweets since the 14th, it looks like.

        • http://twitter.com/jinx_mchue Severe Conservative

          That’s beside the point. They obviously aren’t “hiding” simply because their Facebook page is temporarily closed.

      • Carl

        Despite an escalating nationwide debate on gun control in the wake of Friday’s mass shooting at a Connecticut elementary school, the National Rifle Association has remained conspicuously silent.

        As of Monday evening the largest and most powerful gun-rights lobbying group in the U.S. had not posted anything to its website since Friday morning, when a gunman entered Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton and killed 26 people, 20 of them children.

        The NRA’s Facebook page has been deactivated, and visitors are redirected to a bare-bones page where comments are disabled (although “Likes” are still allowed). Its Twitter account, which typically posts several times a day, also has been quiet. The group’s last tweet, on Friday morning, was a promotional message that said, “10 Days of NRA Giveaways – Enter today for a chance to win an auto emergency tool!”

        Big, brave gun owners cower in fear of tweens on Facebook. Got to love it.

        NRA deactivates Facebook page after Newtown elementary shooting

        http://wtvr.com/2012/12/17/nra-goes-silent-after-newtown-elementary-shooting/

        Is “Jay McHue” another sock puppet for “jim-M”? He lies like Jim_m does…

        (Still waiting for you to back up your claim about Steve’s 5th amendment views, Jim – why are you so chicken — now you’ve gone into hiding behind sockpuppet? Watch — He’ll just run away again… cowardice – just like the NRA.

    • 914

      The liberal guilt projection is strong with this one. I sleep just fine.

    • Conservachef

      …we really can’t fix the problem seriously without removing or amending the second amendment…

      Yeah, if not for that pesky Constitution and Bill of Rights…… We could be living in utopia!

      /sarc

      • jim_m

        He complained the other day about people have the 5th amendment right against self incrimination. I’ll wager there are not very many rights that he would not like to see restricted.

        • Carl

          I’ll call bullshit on that lie.

          Show us where Steve said that, Jim. Or are you a lying sack of poo again?

          Prove me wrong…. come on…

          Waiting….

          Waiting….

          Waiting….

          • jim_m

            http://wizbangblog.com/2012/12/14/adam-lanza-not-his-older-brother-ryan-was-the-newtown-shooter-said-to-be-targeting-his-mother/#comment-737749495

            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

            Steve’s complaint was that he felt that the law was unenforceable because it violated the 5th amendment. I pointed out that only in this case was the requirement for registration not enforceable. I also pointed out at the time that his argument was essentially that the 5th amendment was wrong. He responded to my comment and did not counter my interpretation.

            So we once again see that all you BS about other people lying is exactly that, BS. You have nothing to argue with because everything you have is nothing but ideology. You never post links unless it is another ideological screed. You never present data. You just post a bunch of talking points and then call other people racists and liars.

          • Carl

            you just proved you lied.

            You wrote :“He complained the other day about people have the 5th amendment right against self incrimination. I’ll wager there are not very many rights that he would not like to see restricted.”

            You’ve failed to quote steve complaining about anything of the sort.

            You interpreted in your usual bullshit way – putting words in his mouth and deciding what he meant. It’s jus one of the ways you lie – claiming somebody said “X” when really they said “Y”.

            Just quote Steve complaining about the people’s 5th amendment right. You said you could – now do it.

            We’re still waiting… you’re still lying. Show us you aren’t lying Jim.

            waiting….

            Your excuse that steve did not counter your bullshit isn’t proof of anything.

            it only proves you lied again.

            waiting…..

          • Carl

            you just proved you lied.

            You wrote :“He complained the other day about people have the 5th amendment right against self incrimination. I’ll wager there are not very many rights that he would not like to see restricted.”

            You’ve failed to quote steve complaining about anything of the sort.

            You interpreted in your usual bullshit way – putting words in his mouth and deciding what he meant. It’s jus one of the ways you lie – claiming somebody said “X” when really they said “Y”.

            Just quote Steve complaining about the people’s 5th amendment right. You said you could – now do it.

            We’re still waiting… you’re still lying. Show us you aren’t lying Jim.

            waiting….

            Your excuse that steve did not counter your bullshit isn’t proof of anything.

            it only proves you lied again.

            waiting…..

          • jim_m

            I provided you context. Just because you interpret things differently than I do does not make me a liar. I told you exactly where I got the impression that he was against the 5th amendment.

            Calling everyone who you disagree with a racist and a liar does not win you arguments.

            Try to grow up a little.

            Meanwhile, you still have failed to answer both mine and JLawson’s question on how an assault rifle is more dangerous than a rifle of the same caliber. I even did you the favor of listing the criteria from the federal law.

            Try to engage in a discussion for once.

          • Carl

            You claimed Steve complained about the 5th amendment.

            You’ve failed to show where he did that — repeatedly, despite being asked repeatedly.

            Now you admit that it’s your “interpretation” that he said that – in effect admitting that you lied.

            We’re still waiting, Jim. Either show us where Steve complained about the 5th amendment – or admit you lied.

            Do you seriously want this to go in forever?

            waiting…

            waiting…

            waiting…

          • jim_m

            I’ve answered you and provided a link. Perhaps you could answer my new question up thread.

          • jim_m

            I provided you context. Just because you interpret things differently than I do does not make me a liar. I told you exactly where I got the impression that he was against the 5th amendment.

            Calling everyone who you disagree with a racist and a liar does not win you arguments.

            Try to grow up a little.

            Meanwhile, you still have failed to answer both mine and JLawson’s question on how an assault rifle is more dangerous than a rifle of the same caliber. I even did you the favor of listing the criteria from the federal law.

            Try to engage in a discussion for once.

          • jim_m

            Carl, have you ever had a constructive conversation with anyone on this Blog? I am having difficulty recalling a single instance where you did anything other than snipe and call names.

            While I have my moments, I have had many good discussions with Bruce, Ackwired, Steve, Ryan A and others (perhaps even Chico, once). I don’t think you have ever done anything of the kind.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            Actually, I think he and I were discussing something once, and even somewhat reasonably – then it was like he went “WTF AM I DOING?????”: and dived back into his cesspool.

            He’s got a lot to learn, I think. Which is hard, when you’re convinced you already know everything and anyone who disagrees with your take on things is automatically a liar, a racist, or a racist liar.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            I confess I really don’t know what the fifth amendment is full stop, to be pro or con. I just pasted the decision to show the Supreme Court was back and forth on what I remember was an over’simplifcation..but that’s all I remember.

          • jim_m

            Your complaint was that you felt the NFA was unenforceable because the SCOTUS had ruled that a felon could not be forced to register a weapon and thus incriminate himself. However, it was still illegal for that felon to possess that or any other firearm. The act was not gutted as you said.

            I took it to mean that you felt that he did not deserve the protection of the 5th amendment under those circumstances and that people should be forced to incriminate themselves under certain circumstances. I understand the emotion,but it is still wrong.

  • Commander_Chico

    We humans want to live in a world that is safe, tranquil and predictable.

    I accept that premise for most people, although some want change, excitement, and danger, like Chico.

    The problem is that modern American life is designed to keep almost everyone off balance in the most uncomfortable way. I say “designed” consciously.

    Most people are insecure economically. Jobs can easily go away, incomes are just high enough to maintain what is considered a middle-class existence. There is no loyalty between employer and worker.

    Without knowledge and discipline, few resist the siren call of advertising promising self-esteem and the Meaning of Life through consumption. If only you get that Iphone 5, then all will be right. Americans are described as “consumers.”

    Entertainment is a branch of advertising, sinking to the least common denominators of sex, greed and violence. The education that even the most humble people had in higher culture is long gone.

    The churches are corrupt human institutions, mostly either “feel good” evangelical mega-churches or nakedly hypocritical, like the Catholic Church. Once in awhile you might find a worthy minister, priest or rabbi, but that is due to the individual’s strength of character, an accident.

    Politics is a vapid series of side-shows, while the real problems are ignored or lied about. There is always an enemy, internal or external, which must be hated and feared a’ la 1984. The wars roll on, and new wars are always in the pipeline. The state is owned by moneyed interests, which I call “the oligarchy.”

    The family is destroyed by two-career parents, another function of economic uncertainty, and easy divorce. Parents can’t cocoon their kids from the baying demands of the market peddling the most destructive values exalting greed, sex and violence.

    With all of this, I am surprised there aren’t more shootings. This shit is going to blow up someday into some sort of mass psychosis like Germany 1933, Yugoslavia 1991, or Rwanda 1994. I have my escape already planned. I don’t blame Ms. Lanza for being a “prepper” — the level of social anxiety is high and manifests itself in personal anxiety.

  • ackwired

    If it works for you, that’s great. I don’t think I can just rationalize mass shootings by saying, “evil happens”. I’m old enough to remember when mass shootings were not a part of our society, and I wonder why they did not happen then and they do now. I would like to see an analysis of the similarities and differences of the mass shooters. It seems that we have had enough of them now that we might get some clues as to what is going wrong. I can not endorse a call for us to sit idly by and do nothing because “evil happens”.

    • jim_m

      I’m old enough to remember when mass shootings were not a part of our society,

      Technically, I would say that they were just less publicized since there are records of mass shootings going back over a century and data suggests that there is not an increase in mass shootings at all.

      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.

      Still, he understands the public perception – and extensive media coverage – when mass shootings occur in places like malls and schools. “There is this feeling that could have been me. It makes it so much more frightening.”

      • Commander_Chico

        Yeah but those mass killings in 1929 were business, like St. Valentine’s Day massacre.

        Plus the St. Valentine’s Day massacre only killed seven, and STILL became the stuff of legend, so I don’t think they had mass killings on the scale of the last 20 years, and certainly not the kind of random madness we’ve seen recently.

        • jim_m

          You ignore the data from the 80″s and 90″s. Very convenient.

          • Commander_Chico

            http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map?page=2

            Looks like there were quite few in the 80s and 90s

          • jim_m

            that was my point. Did you bother to read my whole comment?

          • Commander_Chico

            There seems to be an increasing frequency, plus more fatalities per incident. It’s like these kooks are trying to break a record.

          • 914

            Yes. Each trying in succession to outdo the previous for debauchery and media coverage.

          • Commander_Chico

            There is a power of suggestion in the reaction to these killings which fuels more. It’s going to get worse.

          • jim_m

            I would put it down to publicity.

          • Vagabond661

            When there is an killing like this, the media is all to willing to splash his face and name all over the place. And more often than not the info is wrong. Pundits, adding to the inaccurate noise, grab the nearest mike and scream gun control completely ignoring that the places where these tragedies take place are already gun free.

            What is really needed here media control, not gun control.

          • Commander_Chico

            That is insane. Censor the media?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            No more insane than abridging the Second Amendment.

          • Vagabond661

            Exactly.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            No more insane than abridging the Second Amendment.

          • Vagabond661

            Why not? If these people are seeking their 15 minutes, then silence the media. What would be the harm?

          • jim_m

            I’m reminded of the NCIS episode where the serial killer boasts that his name will be known everywhere by the evening news and then they conceal his identity claiming terrorism links.

            While you could temporarily embargo a name you could never suppress the crime itself. I don’t think you could conceal the identity for very long. Ultimately, the FOIA and the propensity for the govenment to leak would mean the information gets out.

          • jim_m

            Hey, It’s not like we are suggesting that we lock reporters in a closet.

            Oh, wait, I guess you’re OK with that form of censorship. Only censor the media when it helps YOUR agenda.

            But I have to agree, censorship is wrong, regardless of the agenda it serves.

          • Vagabond661

            These people commit these acts to get attention and the media enables them to do it. Shut it down at the source. Since the media won’t do it on their own, we need to do it for them.

          • herddog505

            Well, the 2nd Amendment seems to be up for grabs, so why not the 1st?
            I’m not serious, of course, but that seems to be the trend amongst lefties.

          • jim_m

            Other lefties have complained that the registration clause in the 1934 NFA is unenforceable because felons cannot be compelled to register illegal weapons, something that the Supreme Court held was a violation of the 5th amendment.

            The left is certainly against public expression of religious beliefs so that part of the first amendment is certainly expendable to them.

          • Carl

            And other righties have complained that laws against children having access to weapons and ammunition are useless, and that the murder of these children is just so much collateral damage and therefore take a back seat to second amendment rights.

          • jim_m

            Proof. Links. Now.

          • Carl

            Sure, you betcha as soon as you show us the proof I’ve asked for.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            [citation required]

          • Commander_Chico

            yeah but righties are more inclined to gut the fourth, fifth and sixth amendments.

          • Commander_Chico

            What, like the publicity for the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre that survived until we were kids and even had Paper Lace have a #1 hit song about it in 1974? The Night Chicago Died?


          • Commander_Chico

            What, like the publicity for the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre that survived until we were kids and even had Paper Lace have a #1 hit song about it in 1974? The Night Chicago Died?


          • Commander_Chico

            Yeah, I did and even looked at Duwe’s piece. I’m not buying it about mass killings in the 20s. What was he talking about, a few bootlegging mobsters being killed at a time?

            (pdf) http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v6n1/manuscripts/duwe.pdf

    • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

      Actually, from what I’m seeing we’ve had a fair number of them all along – not necessarily mass shootings, but shootings in schools.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States

      And then there were the bombings. This one seems to be the worst.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

      The news was just a lot more localized. Sometimes I think the 24/7 news cycle really sucks…

      • ackwired

        Actually this data seems to support the idea that mass killings are a fairly recent development. With the exception of the guy who bombed a school in the 20′s, there were no mass shootings until the University of Texas tragedy in 1966. The rest of the school shooting listed appear to be acts of retribution directed at a specific person or persons.

        • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

          1891 – first known mass shooting.

          Quite a lot of them were individuals. Some sure seemed gang-related.

          As a percentage of the population overall, it’s pretty darn small… not that it shouldn’t be zero, of course.

  • Carl

    Here’s a summation of six of the extreme policies the NRA has backed and supported which are contributing to the problem.

    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/17/1345641/nra-gun-laws/

  • retired.military

    Carl

    I would like to have a dialogue ref this issue with no BS, straw men, etc.

    I would appreciate it if others not comment on my questions or on Carl’s

    answers. Thank you.

    1. Do you feel that the bigger problem is with guns being available to

    the general public or the people who use them to commit mass shootings?

    Please explain why.

    2. I have 30+ years experience around firearms. I have shot

    everything from a 9 mm handgun up to M60 machine guns and have used live

    hand grenades, M203 grenade launcher and even fired a LAW (light antitank

    weapon) while on active duty. I have ran rifle ranges with up to 100 people

    firing weapons to qualify. I have held a Top secret clearance with SCIF

    access for 15 years and still have a Secret clearance today. Do you feel

    I should be allowed to own weapons and if so how many and what types?

    3. Do you feel people should be allowed to hunt for sport?

    4. Do you feel there should be a limit to the number of guns per person

    in a household?

    5. Do you feel that limiting the size of clips would reduce gun

    violence?

    6. If a person killed 20 children with a knife would you be for more

    knife control laws? Why or why not?

    7. You have made much distinction between these children and unborn

    fetuses. How are these children different than from babies who are born

    alive after a botched abortion? What are you feelings regarding Obama’s

    stance that babies born alive after a botched abortion should be denied

    appropriate medical care and be allowed to die?

    8. Do you feel that the Ft Hood shooting was a terrorist act or simply

    workplace violence?

    9. There are numerous common chemicals you can buy to make home made

    bombs. These can be combined in something as simple as a 2 liter pepsi

    bottle with nails for shrapnel to make a homemade hand grenade/pipe bomb.

    Should these chemicals be banned?

    10. If you feel that people should be allowed to have any type of

    firearm than do you realize that people can take the gunpowder from the

    rounds and make homemade pipe bombs/ hand grenades?

    11. Do you feel that confiscation of all guns from the general public

    is necessary? If so how would you do it? Criminals will not turn over

    their guns willingly and a lot of the general public will simply hide their

    guns and not turn them in voluntarily. What penalties do you propose for

    those that wont turn in guns willingly? Do you realize that the govt cant

    use the military on US ground for police actions (pose cumitatus)?

    12. What type punishments do you feel is appropriate for people who use

    guns in the commission of a crime?

    13. Do you feel that taking guns away from people will stop crimes like

    what happened in Conn fully realizing that if someone wants to kill kids

    they have only to run onto a school bus full of kids with a knife kill the

    driver, and close the door. This person would easily be able to kill all

    the kids before cops show up (and small kids wont even think about using the

    emergency door in the back even if they could get it open).

    14. From my understanding you could easily make a napalm like substance by

    combining petroleum jelly and diesel fuel (and then setting it on fire).

    How do you propose to stop something like this?

    15. What do you propose to do about all the sites on the internet which have

    recipes for homemade bombs etc?

    16. Do you realize that 2/3rds of gun deaths in the US are suicides? If guns

    were unavailable do you feel that most if not the great majority of these

    people would simply commit suicide another way?

    17. If guns are not available and someone wanted to kill as many children as

    possible what is to stop them from driving through a school parking lot

    mowing down as many children as possible and throwing molatov cocktails out

    the window to do even more damage?

    Constructive dialog Please Carl.

    • Carl

      If Lanza’s mother didn’t own an assault rifle many of the dead children would be alive today.

      That’s the bottom line. The rest is just noise. Sensible gun laws, including a ban on the continued manufacture of assault rifles, are needed now.

      Period. Quit diminishing the lives of these murdered Americans in an attempt to justify your own love of guns. You’re free to own whatever is legal – I’m saying we need to move the line that defines what’s legal to own. Making illegal the continued manufacture and sale of assault rifles is a sensible place to move that line.

      How many children have to die before you’ll wake up and admit that there
      is no good reason to own assault rifles? A 30 clip assault rifle
      is not a deer hunting gun — it’s a people hunting gun.

      • jim_m

        Quit diminishing the lives of these murdered Americans in an attempt to justify your own love of guns.

        Carl weasels out of a rational dialogue. Quelle surprise.

        I give great credit to RM for trying to engage this drone. I suggest that it is well past time for olaf

      • retired.military

        Carl

        You cant say for a certainty that the children would still be alive. You have no clue what he would have done if no guns were available to him. I have pointed out several times there are alternate methods to the same point and same ends.

        I have no great love of guns. I own 2. A pistol for home defense and a .22 rifle with a 10 round clip for coyotes as I live in the country. I have never been hunting nor do I wish to go (I value my sleep more and i prefer fishing) I have fired these at 2 different occasions in the past 2 years that I have owned them for target practice only. You assumption that I have a great love of guns is incorrect. In fact when I bought my handgun the salesman though the pistol I picked out was wrong for me. I fire left handed and the mag ejection button is on the left hand side. I told the guy that I am buying it for home defense and if I couldnt hit someone with 13 rounds maybe it would be better if I didnt reload and just throw the gun at him.

        I am not diminishing the lives of the children. I am TRYING to have a logical discussion with you, with no BS. I asked you a series of questions to start a dialogue. That noise as you call it is pertinent to the discussion and your feelings on the subject. Feel free to ask me questions but realize that I asked first so if you answer my questions I will gladly answer yours.

        As I have stated in a different thread a 10 round clip and a 30 round clip are only different as far as how many rounds they can hold. If you dont believe me go to a gun store or pawn shop and look at a 10 round clip for a weapon and a 30 round clip for the same weapon. They are identical except for length of the magazine and the spring inside which pushes the rounds up. That is the only difference

        Again. I ask you to answer the questions and engage me in a reasonable conversation on this issue and the varying facets surrounding it. I have not diminished your answers above and I have replied to them. I ask that you do the same. Question by question. These questions cover the gamut of issues we have discussed on this board the last few days and I want to clear away the clutter and have a sane discussion about the laws, the situation, and what common ground if any we may have.

      • http://twitter.com/jinx_mchue Severe Conservative

        “If Lanza’s mother didn’t own an assault rifle many of the dead children would be alive today.”

        Oh, bullshit. He had other semi-automatic weapons at his disposal.

        And no, there’s no such thing as an “assault rifle.” That’s another invented lie meant to demonize guns and gun owners. Turns out an “assault weapons” ban would not have had one iota of effect on the ownership of the rifle he used.

        http://articles.courant.com/2012-12-17/news/hc-newtown-assault-weapons-20121217_1_assault-weapon-bushmaster-rifles-lethal-weapon

  • mitch

    did you know that members of the NRA received death threats,

    and how are death threats and appropriate response to an organization who today said that it is waiting till all the facts come out about the case which if you have seen in the media, the media tends to fudge the facts just to get hits on there websites.

    so please fwait to talk about drugs or gun laws or changing gun laws anything else until we have the facts

    p.s. did you know that there are 300+ million guns in this country,

    p.s did you know that it is deemed acceptable when Obama drone strikes women and children overseas, what if someone used drones america and your family was hurt, its not the guns but the culture we live in.

  • TSanders

    Is there illegal substance/drugs like THC/marijuana in the shooter’s autopsy?