The "assault rifle" never left the car.

dimitrispearljam

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

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.

you still Alive!!!

PJ_Soul

AllNiteThing wrote:

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?

The medical examiner said that all of the bodies he examined were killed by "the long gun." Since there was only one long gun found at the scene (the assault rifle), that would be the proof I think.

Cosmo

unsung wrote:

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

...
You DO realize that the report you posted was from 15December2012... correct? That was the morning after the murders.
Since that time, facts have surfaced to paint a clearer picture of what happened that day.
...
Come on... you are smarter than that. These type of looney conspiracy theories does nothing but erode away your credibility. The 'Government' had no hand in either the killings nor the reporting... and what you are alleging falls into the ranks of the black helicopters, contrails of doom and George W. Bush evolving from reptiles lunacy.
Please, come back to planet Earth and make rational statements... based in truth and fact... like you used to do.

AllNiteThing

PJ_Soul wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

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?

The medical examiner said that all of the bodies he examined were killed by "the long gun." Since there was only one long gun found at the scene (the assault rifle), that would be the proof I think.

Right, but how does it explain the assault rifle being found in the trunk after the attack?

JimmyV

AllNiteThing wrote:

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?

If the medical examiner is being discounted as part of some liberal conspiracy (seriously?) I don't think there will be any proof out there that will convince the skeptics.

PJ_Soul

AllNiteThing wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

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?

The medical examiner said that all of the bodies he examined were killed by "the long gun." Since there was only one long gun found at the scene (the assault rifle), that would be the proof I think.

Right, but how does it explain the assault rifle being found in the trunk after the attack?

I am assuming that the initial report about the gun being found in the truck of the car was wrong altogether... Another possibility is that he brought it back to the car before blowing his own brains out.

aerial

AllNiteThing wrote:

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?

Can I just point out that the AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle that just shares designs with an assault rifle.....

AllNiteThing

JimmyV wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

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?

If the medical examiner is being discounted as part of some liberal conspiracy (seriously?) I don't think there will be any proof out there that will convince the skeptics.

I hear you, I was just hoping someone could come up with a better argument than "I doubt the medical examiner would lie", especially when there IS video of the cops taking a rifle out of the trunk, and news clips reporting it wasn't used. I agree it's an outlandish conspiracy, but hard to disprove completely without insulting the other person for being loony.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

dimitrispearljam wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

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.

you still Alive!!!

Yes. I survived. I still tremble a touch when someone rips one close to me, but aside from any psychosomatic reactions... I live a relatively normal life.

AllNiteThing

PJ_Soul wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

The medical examiner said that all of the bodies he examined were killed by "the long gun." Since there was only one long gun found at the scene (the assault rifle), that would be the proof I think.

Right, but how does it explain the assault rifle being found in the trunk after the attack?

I am assuming that the initial report about the gun being found in the truck of the car was wrong altogether... Another possibility is that he brought it back to the car before blowing his own brains out.

So I guess what I'm looking for is a specific report that says 1 assault rifle was found on the scene, and ANOTHER was found in the trunk of his car. If only 1 was found, and it was in the trunk after the murders, it would be hard to argue that it was used in the attacks, no?

Cosmo

AllNiteThing wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

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?

The medical examiner said that all of the bodies he examined were killed by "the long gun." Since there was only one long gun found at the scene (the assault rifle), that would be the proof I think.

Right, but how does it explain the assault rifle being found in the trunk after the attack?

...
Wasn't it the shotgun?

ref. http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/connecticut-lanza-guns/index.html
"(CNN) -- Adam Lanza brought three weapons inside Sandy Hook Elementary school on December 14 and left a fourth in his car, police said. Those weapons were a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle and two handguns -- a Glock 10 mm and a Sig Sauer 9 mm.

In the car he left a shotgun, about which police have offered no details. Lanza used one of the handguns to take his own life, although police haven't said whether the gun was the Glock or the Sig Sauer."

PJ_Soul

AllNiteThing wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

Right, but how does it explain the assault rifle being found in the trunk after the attack?

I am assuming that the initial report about the gun being found in the truck of the car was wrong altogether... Another possibility is that he brought it back to the car before blowing his own brains out.

So I guess what I'm looking for is a specific report that says 1 assault rifle was found on the scene, and ANOTHER was found in the trunk of his car. If only 1 was found, and it was in the trunk after the murders, it would be hard to argue that it was used in the attacks, no?

No, since the car was parked right outside from where all the shooting happened. He would have had time to go out to his car before committing suicide. I think that the number of dead and the number of gun shot wounds make it pretty certain that it was the rifle that was used, just as the medical examiner said it was. If it was in the trunk of the car and the only rifle used, I think the guy ran out to his car (perhaps after running out of ammo in that gun?), ditch that weapon (who knows, maybe grabbed one of the hand guns too), ran back in and shot himself.

PJ_Soul

Cosmo wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

The medical examiner said that all of the bodies he examined were killed by "the long gun." Since there was only one long gun found at the scene (the assault rifle), that would be the proof I think.

Right, but how does it explain the assault rifle being found in the trunk after the attack?

...
Wasn't it the shotgun?

ref. http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/connecticut-lanza-guns/index.html
"(CNN) -- Adam Lanza brought three weapons inside Sandy Hook Elementary school on December 14 and left a fourth in his car, police said. Those weapons were a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle and two handguns -- a Glock 10 mm and a Sig Sauer 9 mm.

In the car he left a shotgun, about which police have offered no details. Lanza used one of the handguns to take his own life, although police haven't said whether the gun was the Glock or the Sig Sauer."

Ahh. There you go.

AllNiteThing

Cosmo wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

The medical examiner said that all of the bodies he examined were killed by "the long gun." Since there was only one long gun found at the scene (the assault rifle), that would be the proof I think.

Right, but how does it explain the assault rifle being found in the trunk after the attack?

...
Wasn't it the shotgun?

ref. http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/connecticut-lanza-guns/index.html
"(CNN) -- Adam Lanza brought three weapons inside Sandy Hook Elementary school on December 14 and left a fourth in his car, police said. Those weapons were a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle and two handguns -- a Glock 10 mm and a Sig Sauer 9 mm.

In the car he left a shotgun, about which police have offered no details. Lanza used one of the handguns to take his own life, although police haven't said whether the gun was the Glock or the Sig Sauer."

Thank you! I guess I could have probably found that on my own, but that's exactly what I was looking for, and makes the most sense. Speaking of sense, I'll see if that proof resonates with my gun friend.

Cosmo

PJ_Soul wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

AllNiteThing wrote:

Right, but how does it explain the assault rifle being found in the trunk after the attack?

...
Wasn't it the shotgun?

ref. http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/connecticut-lanza-guns/index.html
"(CNN) -- Adam Lanza brought three weapons inside Sandy Hook Elementary school on December 14 and left a fourth in his car, police said. Those weapons were a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle and two handguns -- a Glock 10 mm and a Sig Sauer 9 mm.

In the car he left a shotgun, about which police have offered no details. Lanza used one of the handguns to take his own life, although police haven't said whether the gun was the Glock or the Sig Sauer."

Ahh. There you go.

...
It was also reported that the AR-15 was used to breech the locked doors at the school's entrance. It seems unreasonable to a rational human being with the tools of logic and critical thought process at his command to come to a conclusion where the murderer shoots out the locked glass doors... then, returns to the vehicle to secure the weapon... rather than taking the one weapon in his possession that has the greatest killing potential with him into the school. Logic and reason tells me that he shot out the doors and carried the weapon with him to commit the murderous acts.

JimmyV

Cosmo wrote:

unsung wrote:

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

...
You DO realize that the report you posted was from 15December2012... correct? That was the morning after the murders.
Since that time, facts have surfaced to paint a clearer picture of what happened that day.
...
Come on... you are smarter than that. These type of looney conspiracy theories does nothing but erode away your credibility. The 'Government' had no hand in either the killings nor the reporting... and what you are alleging falls into the ranks of the black helicopters, contrails of doom and George W. Bush evolving from reptiles lunacy.
Please, come back to planet Earth and make rational statements... based in truth and fact... like you used to do.

Given the Rahm Emmanuel quote he followed up with, I am curious to hear how the OP responds to several posts in this thread.

Cosmo

AllNiteThing wrote:

Thank you! I guess I could have probably found that on my own, but that's exactly what I was looking for, and makes the most sense. Speaking of sense, I'll see if that proof resonates with my gun friend.

...
Not a problem.
Facts are hard to come by... especially during a chaotic event. Time... used to apply reason, thought and logic to evidence reveal the facts.
also... ask your gun friends what they would use if they had an AR-15, two 9mm pistols and a shot gun at their disposal. They will tell you... the one weapon with the highest kill rate is the AR-15. If they tell you otherwise... they are NOT gun people.

Kat

Was closed for review.

1. Attacking another member will make your forum account read-only.
2. Gossiping about other members is a violation of the Posting Guidelines. Don't do it. It doesn't reflect positively on YOU.
3. Quoting the attack and/or gossip will result in your post being removed.
4. This thread may be closed again...old info refuted already? We'll see how the discussion goes.

Cosmo

Kat wrote:

Was closed for review.

1. Attacking another member will make your forum account read-only.
2. Gossiping about other members is a violation of the Posting Guidelines. Don't do it. It doesn't reflect positively on YOU.
3. Quoting the attack and/or gossip will result in your post being removed.
4. This thread may be closed again...old info refuted already? We'll see how the discussion goes.

...
Thanx for that.
This is a good discussion on the media and guns as related to that awful tragedy in Newtown. It is a lesson in the media's hunger to jump the other news outlets on the 'Breaking News' and trying to use initial reports to solidify a position.
We, as thinking, rational people... need to understand this and step away from the sound bites, slogans and newslet clips of biased opinion and try to see these types of things in the light of truth... so, hopefully, we never have to re-live these events.

JimmyV

Still waiting...