26 or 27 Victims?

Who Princess

JimmyV wrote:

covered in bliss wrote:

was adam lanza a responsible gun owner?

let's ask everyone this: how could anyone establish that adam lanza shouldn't buy/hold/be anywhere in 100 yards of a gun? What criteria did he meet? Anyone? Oh, that's right... there's nothing.

His Aspergers has gotten much attention. You would think that might be enough to legally prevent him from obtaining a firearm. In Lanza's case it does not seem too hard to establish the criteria.

Excerpt that ignores the fact that the majority of people with Aspergers are not violent. There was more to this guy but I don't know what.

JimmyV

Who Princess wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

covered in bliss wrote:

was adam lanza a responsible gun owner?

let's ask everyone this: how could anyone establish that adam lanza shouldn't buy/hold/be anywhere in 100 yards of a gun? What criteria did he meet? Anyone? Oh, that's right... there's nothing.

His Aspergers has gotten much attention. You would think that might be enough to legally prevent him from obtaining a firearm. In Lanza's case it does not seem too hard to establish the criteria.

Excerpt that ignores the fact that the majority of people with Aspergers are not violent. There was more to this guy but I don't know what.

Are they not violent or are they not violent yet? (I am asking not implying the answer is the latter. I really do not know.)

And yes, there was much more to this guy. Aspergers or no, there were other factors that led him to commit these crimes.

Who Princess

JimmyV wrote:

Who Princess wrote:

Excerpt that ignores the fact that the majority of people with Aspergers are not violent. There was more to this guy but I don't know what.

Are they not violent or are they not violent yet? (I am asking not implying the answer is the latter. I really do not know.)

And yes, there was much more to this guy. Aspergers or no, there were other factors that led him to commit these crimes.

I think Aspergers is a catch-all term for people who are on the autism spectrum. They have difficulty with interpersonal skills but so do some people who aren't autistic. And by difficulty, I mean things like making eye contact and ability to function in social situations. They are usually highly interested in some limited, specific areas. I worked with a young man who had trouble carrying on an ordinary conversation but was an encyclopedia of sports information. A young woman I worked with was intelligent and had the ability to learn lots of facts but had difficulty applying them to real life. She regularly said completely inappropriate things to clients and co-workers.

I'm no expert but the young man I mentioned was my client. I was a vocational counselor and was trying to help him prepare for employment. I had to learn a little about Aspergers while working with him. My knowledge is limited but I never got any impression that I should be concerned about prospective violence just because someone has an Aspergers diagnosis.

Also, Aspergers has been a catch-all diagnosis for many years. I think now doctors try to determine where someone is on the autism spectrum.

chadwick

i like good high quality made knives & swords; am i a nutjob for owning many? i have enough actually but i would like more because it is what i like. that list means almost nothing to me. i am sorry if that is harsh or whatever but it is the truth. i know a lot of people who own, deal & collect firearms as a hobby & whatnot. some of them even reload their own shells. that is a pretty hardcore weapons fanatic. they are actually the safest & most educated people i've ever known when it comes to firearms

JimmyV

Who Princess wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

Who Princess wrote:

Excerpt that ignores the fact that the majority of people with Aspergers are not violent. There was more to this guy but I don't know what.

Are they not violent or are they not violent yet? (I am asking not implying the answer is the latter. I really do not know.)

And yes, there was much more to this guy. Aspergers or no, there were other factors that led him to commit these crimes.

I think Aspergers is a catch-all term for people who are on the autism spectrum. They have difficulty with interpersonal skills but so do some people who aren't autistic. And by difficulty, I mean things like making eye contact and ability to function in social situations. They are usually highly interested in some limited, specific areas. I worked with a young man who had trouble carrying on an ordinary conversation but was an encyclopedia of sports information. A young woman I worked with was intelligent and had the ability to learn lots of facts but had difficulty applying them to real life. She regularly said completely inappropriate things to clients and co-workers.

I'm no expert but the young man I mentioned was my client. I was a vocational counselor and was trying to help him prepare for employment. I had to learn a little about Aspergers while working with him. My knowledge is limited but I never got any impression that I should be concerned about prospective violence just because someone has an Aspergers diagnosis.

Also, Aspergers has been a catch-all diagnosis for many years. I think now doctors try to determine where someone is on the autism spectrum.

It is sad because so many of these people will never enjoy what you or I might consider a normal life. But I do think there is an open question whether, once you have been diagnosed with a condition like this, whether you should have access to firearms the way Lanza did. I hate to further ostracize these people but it is a discussion worth having.

Who Princess

JimmyV wrote:

It is sad because so many of these people will never enjoy what you or I might consider a normal life. But I do think there is an open question whether, once you have been diagnosed with a condition like this, whether you should have access to firearms the way Lanza did. I hate to further ostracize these people but it is a discussion worth having.

I agree and I would hate to single people out with suspicions. I wish there would be more investigation into the things which cause people to be violent this way. It seems when something like this happens, there's a lot of talk about something being done then everybody backs away from it.

Cosmo

covered in bliss wrote:

was adam lanza a responsible gun owner?

let's ask everyone this: how could anyone establish that adam lanza shouldn't buy/hold/be anywhere in 100 yards of a gun? What criteria did he meet? Anyone? Oh, that's right... there's nothing.

...
I'll play:
How could anyone establish that adam lanza shouldn't buy/hold/be anywhere in 100 yards of a gun?
How about an increased background check? Maybe one that would figure out whether or not he needed a more thorough investigation... which may have to include a check on his mental capacities.

What criteria did he meet?
He met the criteria by having the cash on hand and no criminal record. That is good enough to legally buy a gun, right?

Anyone?
Me.

donnaruhl

Cosmo wrote:

covered in bliss wrote:

was adam lanza a responsible gun owner?

let's ask everyone this: how could anyone establish that adam lanza shouldn't buy/hold/be anywhere in 100 yards of a gun? What criteria did he meet? Anyone? Oh, that's right... there's nothing.

...
I'll play:
How could anyone establish that adam lanza shouldn't buy/hold/be anywhere in 100 yards of a gun?
How about an increased background check? Maybe one that would figure out whether or not he needed a more thorough investigation... which may have to include a check on his mental capacities.

What criteria did he meet?
He met the criteria by having the cash on hand and no criminal record. That is good enough to legally buy a gun, right?

Anyone?
Me.

Special Need's is a good start!

Cosmo

donnaruhl wrote:

Special Need's is a good start!

...
I think it is relatively simple... establish a ring of security precautions.
A background check for criminal records and a basic apptitude test.
Fail the criminal background and you are denied... fail the aptitude tests and it triggers other requirements... maybe tests for emotional stability, anger issues, whatever.
Just something that will make it tough for mentally unstable people to buy guns. He is still going to be unstable, but if he comes at me with a baseball bat, i can take that bat away from him and beat his ass with it... but, if he come at me with a Streetsweeper... I'm dead.
...
And yeah... crazy people will still be able to get guns... let's at least make it harder for them to get one other than having enough dollars in their pockets.

Prince Of Dorkness

Do we think that Frankenstein was a victim of his monster or do we think he was an idiot who committed suicide by creating a monster that killed him and a bunch of people?

Just glad that the gun lunatic lobby has her as their poster girl. A batshit crazy gun lover who created her own monster.

Is she a victim? Yeah. Of her own stupidity. So I vote 26. We shouldn't shed a tear for her. She got what she deserved, if you ask me.

chadwick

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Do we think that Frankenstein was a victim of his monster or do we think he was an idiot who committed suicide by creating a monster that killed him and a bunch of people?

Just glad that the gun lunatic lobby has her as their poster girl. A batshit crazy gun lover who created her own monster.

Is she a victim? Yeah. Of her own stupidity. So I vote 26.

pretty much dead on

btw, im buying chuck manson 14 tanks for christmas.

Bronx Bombers

Its been over 3 months so where is the toxicology report, what exactly was this kid taking before he went on this rampage? I'm guessing the same reason the list of medication seized from James Holmes apartment has never been released.

Cliffy6745

Bronx Bombers wrote:

Its been over 3 months so where is the toxicology report, what exactly was this kid taking before he went on this rampage? I'm guessing the same reason the list of medication seized from James Holmes apartment has never been released.

What's that reason?

People are funny. Drugs that a few lunatics take help hundreds of thousands of people and all of a sudden those drugs are the problem. Could it possibly be that people with issues are taking drugs and they would have done it regardless? How about the fact that this kid was a raging lunatic in the first place and there were 842 warning signs

Prince Of Dorkness

Bronx Bombers wrote:

Its been over 3 months so where is the toxicology report, what exactly was this kid taking before he went on this rampage? I'm guessing the same reason the list of medication seized from James Holmes apartment has never been released.

Yeah. Let's blame ADHD medicine. That's a good idea.

:fp:

catefrances

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Do we think that Frankenstein was a victim of his monster or do we think he was an idiot who committed suicide by creating a monster that killed him and a bunch of people?

Just glad that the gun lunatic lobby has her as their poster girl. A batshit crazy gun lover who created her own monster.

Is she a victim? Yeah. Of her own stupidity. So I vote 26. We shouldn't shed a tear for her. She got what she deserved, if you ask me.

she got what she deserved? are you kidding me???

... she was a victim. her son murdered her. he didnt kill her in self defence. it sickens me that there are people who have turned on the mother.. as if it were she who pulled the trigger that murdered those at sandy hook. did she teach her son to go on deadly rampages? no. did she encourage him to do so? no. one must be held responsible for ones own actions. in this case.. adam lanza is responsible for those deaths(including that of his mother). no one else.

JimmyV

catefrances wrote:

she got what she deserved? are you kidding me???

... she was a victim. her son murdered her. he didnt kill her in self defence. it sickens me that there are people who have turned on the mother.. as if it were she who pulled the trigger that murdered those at sandy hook. did she teach her son to go on deadly rampages? no. did she encourage him to do so? no. one must be held responsible for ones own actions. in this case.. adam lanza is responsible for those deaths(including that of his mother). no one else.

If she had not encouraged her son to take-up collecting firearms, if she herself had not been a gun lover, would those children still be alive today? Would she? I think you could make a convincing case that the answer to both questions is yes.

As I said earlier, she is not a victim in the same sense that those children and their teachers are victims. But having her last moments be filled the sight of her son turning into a monster and opening fire is an awful way to go. Did she deserve that? I don't know. It is hard to say anyone deserves that.

catefrances

JimmyV wrote:

catefrances wrote:

she got what she deserved? are you kidding me???

... she was a victim. her son murdered her. he didnt kill her in self defence. it sickens me that there are people who have turned on the mother.. as if it were she who pulled the trigger that murdered those at sandy hook. did she teach her son to go on deadly rampages? no. did she encourage him to do so? no. one must be held responsible for ones own actions. in this case.. adam lanza is responsible for those deaths(including that of his mother). no one else.

If she had not encouraged her son to take-up collecting firearms, if she herself had not been a gun lover, would those children still be alive today? Would she? I think you could make a convincing case that the answer to both questions is yes.

As I said earlier, she is not a victim in the same sense that those children and their teachers are victims. But having her last moments be filled the sight of her son turning into a monster and opening fire is an awful way to go. Did she deserve that? I don't know. It is hard to say anyone deserves that.

if... if... if... supposition.

JimmyV

catefrances wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

catefrances wrote:

she got what she deserved? are you kidding me???

... she was a victim. her son murdered her. he didnt kill her in self defence. it sickens me that there are people who have turned on the mother.. as if it were she who pulled the trigger that murdered those at sandy hook. did she teach her son to go on deadly rampages? no. did she encourage him to do so? no. one must be held responsible for ones own actions. in this case.. adam lanza is responsible for those deaths(including that of his mother). no one else.

If she had not encouraged her son to take-up collecting firearms, if she herself had not been a gun lover, would those children still be alive today? Would she? I think you could make a convincing case that the answer to both questions is yes.

As I said earlier, she is not a victim in the same sense that those children and their teachers are victims. But having her last moments be filled the sight of her son turning into a monster and opening fire is an awful way to go. Did she deserve that? I don't know. It is hard to say anyone deserves that.

if... if... if... supposition.

Her behavior left a lot of questions. Hard to feel completely sympathetic.

catefrances

JimmyV wrote:

catefrances wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

If she had not encouraged her son to take-up collecting firearms, if she herself had not been a gun lover, would those children still be alive today? Would she? I think you could make a convincing case that the answer to both questions is yes.

As I said earlier, she is not a victim in the same sense that those children and their teachers are victims. But having her last moments be filled the sight of her son turning into a monster and opening fire is an awful way to go. Did she deserve that? I don't know. It is hard to say anyone deserves that.

if... if... if... supposition.

Her behavior left a lot of questions. Hard to feel completely sympathetic.

a lot of questions that wont be answered cause her son shot her dead.

JimmyV

catefrances wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

catefrances wrote:

if... if... if... supposition.

Her behavior left a lot of questions. Hard to feel completely sympathetic.

a lot of questions that wont be answered cause her son shot her dead.

With guns she brought into the home. With guns she trained her son to use. You can call it supposition but I believe those children would still be alive today if she had not armed him to the teeth.