Adam Lanza's mother

[cannabineer]

She was a mentally ill gun nut who had a mentally ill kid who murdered 26 people. She was a doomsdayer stockpiling guns and ammo to prepare for the end of the world and any psychological examination would have revealed this. Unfortunately gun nuts are against any type of mental screening for guns so this is what we get.

How do you know she was mentally ill?

And not all gun owners and collectors are gun nuts. You seem to want to demonize what you hate. cn

 

[NoDrama]

Will it help you understand if I type this out slower???

She is being brought up because it was HER FUCKING GUNS THAT LED TO THE DEATH OF 20 CHILDREN!!!!! If it turns out that she left the guns out accessible to her apparently nutter of a son, then I think that this is a very relevant item to discuss surrounding this shooting!!

And yeah, liberals are "rude and have no respect for others" says the guy that couldn't care less about how many kids are mowed down by guns in this country so long as he gets to keep his little collection.

Every gun belongs to someone. You realize this? If I steal your gun and shoot someone with it, it is not your fault no matter how much you try to say it is. I will fight to uphold that principal

 

[st0wandgrow]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nancy-lanza-feared-son-adam-worse-article-1.1221505

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/12/18/167527771/nancy-lanza-gunmans-mother-from-charmed-upbringing-to-first-victim

By every account on record. Ms Lanza was a responsible gun owner and always obeyed the laws. Her character is upright and responsible and she tried to instill this on her son. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that she did not use that gun vault her sister describes seeing.

If your child drives a car super responsibly and shows every sign of the perfect driver , has no infractions and behaves the right way, would you suspect that he or she was going to drive through a crowd of people then off a cliff in 3 days time?

OK, there is no mention what so ever that those guns, on that day were locked in the vault. Just friends speculating that she wouldn't leave them out. Did you happen to read the first link you posted?? It paints a picture of a mother that KNEW her son was very disturbed and "slipping away". As a responsible adult I would never give ANY mentally disturbed person access to my guns ..... family or not.

I will wait until the criminal investigation is done, and they release their findings. If it turns out that the guns were locked up, and that her son stole the key, or otherwise broke in to the safe then I will look at this a little differently. I still feel that having guns around a mentally sick person that is showing disturbing signs is careless. By all accounts she sounded like a great person. Perhaps she is only guilty of being a naive parent.

 

[cannabineer]

What does her being dead have to do with the issue? This isn't about piling on. This could have been anyone, but the issue still remains. Should gun owners be responsible for taking proper care of their guns, and if they don't, should they be held responsible for criminal actions carried out through the use of those guns?

Yes, but at the same time "proper care" needs to be defined. Arguing that because a determined individual could eventually access the guns ... proves that the guns were irresponsibly secured is circular. You seem to want to equate responsible with failsafe. There is nothing failsafe in the world in which we live.
Can you accept the possibility that she DID store her guns responsibly and that her son could have gotten to them anyway? This wasn't an instance of the guns just laying around, conveniently accessible. cn

 

[NoDrama]

for people to have a reasonable dialog about this problem. You have posted several times they were locked, I too have looked for this fact as you state and I have fallen short to find it. The original question was designed to question the liability of the individual who decides to own assault weapons and why one would want to own said weapons.

I think its a fair debate to say someone with these circumstances should not have had these type of weapons, in fact NO one should have these type of weapon. Who on earth needs a device that can shoot high power rounds as fast as you can pull the trigger in the tune of 100 rounds or more b4 you have to stop and reload? Lets say adams mom bought him a M1 Grand. Maybe we would have had a few more children around, remember jared loughner was subdued when he had to stop and reload. How do you stop 100 rounds of death? Ban the ability to own large capacity mags.

look I own guns, I have a CPL and carry a GLOCK. I would love to own an AR-15 but there is no rational reason to own any of these weapons, including high capacity mags.

No assault weapons were used, a semi automatic rifle is not an assault weapon. Assault weapons are capable of full automatic fire. She had nothing like that in her massive stockpile of horded weapons, all three of them.

The proof of her using a gun vault is the existence of a gun vault and her enthusiasm for the respected and responsible handling of guns. What possible evidence do you have that she just had guns and ammo just laying about?

 

[NoDrama]

Perhaps she is only guilty of being a naive parent.

She isn't guilty of anything, stop watching the news, they got you all wound up.

 

[st0wandgrow]

What evidence has been shown to say that we don't care about those kids. This incident is tragic and thinking about those little tikes being buried right now brings a tear to my eye. How dare you label us as uncaring just because we want to express our right to bear arms.

The bodies weren't even cold yet and all the gun advocates could talk about was the impending "ban on guns".

Besides, I was replying to your butt-buddy that suggested that all "liberals are rude, and have no respect for others". Where is your outrage with that nonsense?

 

[st0wandgrow]

Every gun belongs to someone. You realize this? If I steal your gun and shoot someone with it, it is not your fault no matter how much you try to say it is. I will fight to uphold that principal

No matter how careless I am with that gun?

 

[Canna Sylvan]

And yeah, liberals are "rude and have no respect for others" says the guy that couldn't care less about how many kids are mowed down by guns in this country so long as he gets to keep his little collection.

I'm not the one who thinks guns are alive. I care deeply for kids. Guns are what help protect them. More guns, not less, would've prevented this. Think. Adam Lanza shot himself once the cops got there with guns like he had. Why do you think he chose a school with little kids? He's a pussy who did this in a wonderfully safe, for him, gun free zone! Problem is, criminals become the only one with a gun when you make it gun free. Who would've thought! Your solution is saying I'm the problem because I don't want to give up mine. The fuck?

 

[racerboy71]

my honest question is why do i see all of these threads mentioning this scum fucks name at all?? yes, i'm sure we all know it already, but why give this piece of shit the space on any board or website??
why not just address him as the pos child killer, and let us try and forget his name and instead remember one of the names of the victims instead of this asshole??
carry on..

 

[st0wandgrow]

Yes, but at the same time "proper care" needs to be defined. Arguing that because a determined individual could eventually access the guns ... proves that the guns were irresponsibly secured is circular. You seem to want to equate responsible with failsafe. There is nothing failsafe in the world in which we live.
Can you accept the possibility that she DID store her guns responsibly and that her son could have gotten to them anyway? This wasn't an instance of the guns just laying around, conveniently accessible. cn

You make a valid point, and I have touched on that distinction already. I just feel that there should be *some* onus on a gun owner to take reasonable steps to secure their guns. Expecting that a gun be broken down and locked in 3 separate bunkers throughout the house would be unreasonable, and would defeat the purpose of having guns in the house to begin with. However, if someone carelessly leaves a gun laying around, and that gun is then used to kill another human, I feel that the gun owner should share some of the blame.

 

[cannabineer]

You make a valid point, and I have touched on that distinction already. I just feel that there should be *some* onus on a gun owner to take reasonable steps to secure their guns. Expecting that a gun be broken down and locked in 3 separate bunkers throughout the house would be unreasonable, and would defeat the purpose of having guns in the house to begin with. However, if someone carelessly leaves a gun laying around, and that gun is then used to kill another human, I feel that the gun owner should share some of the blame.

I understand that. But unless I'm committing a gaffe of logic, your first post and the whole thread seems predicated upon the mother having been negligent. A zero-failure-tolerance policy is not practical or honest ... it tends to be a camouflaged demand for a ban. Jmo. cn

 

[st0wandgrow]

I'm not the one who thinks guns are alive. I care deeply for kids. Guns are what help protect them. More guns, not less, would've prevented this. Think. Adam Lanza shot himself once the cops got there with guns like he had. Why do you think he chose a school with little kids? He's a pussy who did this in a wonderfully safe, for him, gun free zone! Problem is, criminals become the only one with a gun when you make it gun free. Who would've thought! Your solution is saying I'm the problem because I don't want to give up mine. The fuck?

I never said that you're the problem. I support your right to own guns. But does that right come with any responsibilities? We live in a country where a bar can be found criminally negligent if it over-serves a customer, and that person then gets in his car and kills someone due to being intoxicated. How is it such a stretch to look at a shooting and assign some blame to the person that allowed their weapons to be used to carry out the murder?

 

[NoDrama]

No matter how careless I am with that gun?

No matter how careless? Are you assuming that Ms Lanza loaded the weapons and a bunch of extra magazines and placed them under the pillow of her son's bed with a note attached saying that it was show and tell day at the local kindergarten?

She had a gun vault, her sister attests to seeing it, we have multiple witnesses attesting to the fact that she was an extremely responsible gun owner, plus witnesses who explained that the son was meticulous about safety and care of the guns. Yet your knee-jerk reaction is that she MUST have just had them laying around full loaded, doors unlocked with a neon sign at the freeway that said "loaded and locked guns free to whomever wants them, enter by front door."

 

[NoDrama]

I never said that you're the problem. I support your right to own guns. But does that right come with any responsibilities? We live in a country where a bar can be found criminally negligent if it over-serves a customer, and that person then gets in his car and kills someone due to being intoxicated. How is it such a stretch to look at a shooting and assign some blame to the person that allowed their weapons to be used to carry out the murder?

Is being drunk one of your enumerated civil rights?

What evidence do you have that she gave permission for the guns to be used in the manner they were? You said it now please put up at least something to give your argument at least a tint of credibility.

 

[st0wandgrow]

I understand that. But unless I'm committing a gaffe of logic, your first post and the whole thread seems predicated upon the mother having been negligent. A zero-failure-tolerance policy is not practical or honest ... it tends to be a camouflaged demand for a ban. Jmo. cn

Why can't there ever be a dialogue in this country about common sense measures that can be taken concerning gun ownership without people automatically assuming a gun ban? It's like this boogey monster that doesn't even exist, only in the minds of gun owners.

I support the right to bear arms even if I choose not to exercise that right. The VAST majority of Americans support that right. I don't think a conversation about the limitations of that right is unreasonable, or out of line.

 

[st0wandgrow]

Is being drunk one of your enumerated civil rights?

What evidence do you have that she gave permission for the guns to be used in the manner they were? You said it now please put up at least something to give your argument at least a tint of credibility.

So because something is a civil right, it excuses you from exercising that right in a responsible, legal manor?

 

[cannabineer]

So because something is a civil right, it excuses you from exercising that right in a responsible, legal manor?

Of course not. But I reserve the inalienable right to define "reasonable" and to a lesser extent "legal", for myself. cn

 

[st0wandgrow]

Is being drunk one of your enumerated civil rights?

What evidence do you have that she gave permission for the guns to be used in the manner they were? You said it now please put up at least something to give your argument at least a tint of credibility.

Freedom of religion is one of my civil rights, but that doesn't grant me permission to harm others in the name of my religion.

 

[olylifter420]

Man that the dumbest shit ever. Its like if your dad murdered someone and offed himself so the remaining family is at fault. Fucking stupid


Or americans should be blamed as well for all the innocent deaths in iraq and the middle east


stupid radio show just fear mongering

This question was put out there by a local radio show last night:

If Adam Lanza's mother were alive today, should she be found guilty of anything?

The hosts of the radio show surmised that since she knew her son was mentally ill, should she have had guns in the house to begin with, and furthermore should she have taught him how to use those guns, and would she have been criminally liable for not properly securing those guns that ultimately led to the death of 26 people?

The hosts were not sure what laws were in CT (nor am I), but asked their listeners if there weren't any existing laws dealing with this, should there be?