The "assault rifle" never left the car.

unsung

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495

Smellyman

wow. good info.

guess we should ban them all

Thirty Bills Unpaid

The most 'telling part of the story' was that he got into an argument with school staff members on the 13th.

He then tried to go buy a rifle and was denied for reasons unstated (newscaster said there is a waiting period which might have been one).

What's my point (if you don't know already)?

He got into an argument. He was mad. He went to buy a gun and put the argument to rest. Was denied. No big deal. He knew where there were ample guns. He went and got those guns and... the rest is history.

Go buy some more guns unsung. I'm likely not alone when I say to you I have no more time or energy to dedicate trying to illustrate the glaring and ridiculously obvious need for gun reform in your country. I mean... what more can possibly be said?

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

markin ball

The video in the OP is from Dec. 15th. Much has been learned since then.

http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/27/sett ... ter-ar-15/

Setting the Record Straight: Adam Lanza Did use the Bushmaster AR-15
By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | December 27th, 2012 at 08:12 PM | 25

RESIZE: AAA
The media did a horrible job getting its facts and figures straight during and after the tragedy in Connecticut. Gun control advocates have seized on a lot of information and ignored a lot of information in an effort to push their agenda.

But I’m seeing gun rights supporters do the same. Most troubling, over the past week on radio filling in for Neal Boortz I’ve heard from dozens of callers, tweeters, Facebook friends, and email correspondents assuring me that Adam Lanza never used the AR-15 in his possession. Most people linked to a video purportedly showing the police retrieving the AR-15 from Adam Lanza’s car after the incident.

I don’t blame these people for getting the facts wrong. The media caused a lot of the misinformation in their rush to cover the story. But as the nation begins to set policy (or not) based on this random act of violence, we should all have our facts straight.

The fact is, Adam Lanza used a handgun to take his own life, but he relied on the Bushmaster AR-15 to kill most of the victims. He did use that gun. You don’t have to believe me. Believe Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance:

The primary weapon used in the attack was a “Bushmaster AR-15 assault-type weapon,” said Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance.

Let’s keep to the facts, not the grainy videos on YouTube purporting to show what is not true.

unsung

You mean much has been changed.

The gun was found in the car.

Rahm Emmanuel said, "never let a good crisis go to waste."

It's wool pulled over the eyes of America.

markin ball

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2012/12/15/s ... ion-deaths

The above is a link to a press conference the medical examiner gave in which he said all wounds he is aware of were caused by the long weapon (he had performed 7 of the autopsies). Then someone asks if the rifle was the primary weapon and he says "yes".

It's just a simple internet search.

PJ_Soul

Yeah, it was first reported that the long gun was in the car (I mentioned thatyselfnin some other thread right after it happened). But it's really old news now that that was NOT in fact the case, and that he did use the long gun in the killing. It was, in fact, the main weapon used. If you don't known this by now unsung, you are wearing some SERIOUS blinders. If you are going to use a recent tragedy to support your views, then you should probably pay closer attention to the details of the tragedy.
The media did a poor job of reporting at first with this.

Newch91

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

He then tried to go buy a rifle and was denied for reasons unstated (newscaster said there is a waiting period which might have been one).

The gunman was 20. Connecticut law is 21 to buy a gun. There is also a waiting period.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Newch91 wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

He then tried to go buy a rifle and was denied for reasons unstated (newscaster said there is a waiting period which might have been one).

The gunman was 20. Connecticut law is 21 to buy a gun. There is also a waiting period.

Thanks!

Newch91

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Newch91 wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

He then tried to go buy a rifle and was denied for reasons unstated (newscaster said there is a waiting period which might have been one).

The gunman was 20. Connecticut law is 21 to buy a gun. There is also a waiting period.

Thanks!

Glad to help. Here's more info:

http://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/law/firearms.htm

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

JimmyV

PJ_Soul wrote:

Yeah, it was first reported that the long gun was in the car (I mentioned thatyselfnin some other thread right after it happened). But it's really old news now that that was NOT in fact the case, and that he did use the long gun in the killing. It was, in fact, the main weapon used. If you don't known this by now unsung, you are wearing some SERIOUS blinders. If you are going to use a recent tragedy to support your views, then you should probably pay closer attention to the details of the tragedy.
The media did a poor job of reporting at first with this.

Yep. Never let the facts get in the way of some good old political spin. Kinda funny given the Rahm Emmanuel quote earlier on.

blackredyellow

unsung wrote:

You mean much has been changed.

The gun was found in the car.

Rahm Emmanuel said, "never let a good crisis go to waste."

It's wool pulled over the eyes of America.

Yes, much of the story as it initially came out were wrong. Once again, our media was dead set on being first than being right.

They initially reported that his mother was a teacher there, and she was killed in her classroom with the kids. It was also reported that Ryan Lanza (his older brother) was the shooter, and Ryan's facebook profile was even shown.

So yes, details have changed, not "have been changed", but keep trying to spin things...

mickeyrat

yep, from the time he put it in the car to the time he took it out to shoot up the school, it never left the car.

aerial

What about the two men running from the scene the cops chased down in the woods? Anyone heard who these guys were?

PJ_Soul

aerial wrote:

What about the two men running from the scene the cops chased down in the woods? Anyone heard who these guys were?

This is the first time I've even heard that.... I'm going to assume they were no one.

aerial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLmCf-SsJPA

starting about 2:14 ........... independent investigators will be prosecuted?

dimitrispearljam

so,if stays at the car,whit what he killed those poor kids?

with his "assault eyelook",or with is "assault farts"?

dimitrispearljam

BinFrog wrote:

if you look at A Moving Train, there are 3-4 posters ruining it for everyone. They think they are riling things up and exposing the truth. Really they are just sad internet trolls with a worn out shtick.

we all know them....

and i dont understand why some of the rest of us taking their bait every day..

ignore is the best way

PJ_Soul

JimmyV wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

As much as I dont agree with the 3-4 folks I assume you're talking about, this place would be boring if there were no head on collisions.

I have no problem with differing opinions and I enjoy a good debate. But I do think some of our more vocal friends on the right far too often resort to blatant trolling.

It's true... although I do wonder if we all just THINK they're trolling but those are actually their true thoughts and feelings. :? In any case, I don't mind them. I think it's really entertaining, especially when people really get worked up.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

dimitrispearljam wrote:

so,if stays at the car,whit what he killed those poor kids?

with his "assault eyelook",or with is "assault farts"?

I have been a victim of a fart assault. Many times. My cousin used to hold me down and fart in my face. I was much smaller and younger at the time. There wasn't much I could do except hold my breath and pray to God I wouldn't get pink eye.

AllNiteThing

Not to bring this thread back on topic or anything (god forbid), but can someone give some kind of definitive proof that he did use the assault rifle? There are both reports that he did (the medical examiner, most news outlets), and reports that he didn't (the 'car trunk' video and various websites). I'm fairly certain it was used, but there is a gun nut at my office who says the car trunk video is a gotcha moment showing the bias of the media, and that the examiner is obviously either incompetent or part of this 'conspiracy'. I'm not one to fall for that bs, but honestly I don't see anything good to refute his argument, other than to say that it's a stretch to think the examiner was wrong. What exactly was that rifle in the trunk and is there any other concrete proof that that or another assault rifle was used in the school?