Looks like the Mayans were right

One thing that no one was talking about as to the 2012 thing was that the calender meant the death of the old world. A Quatreying(SP) from Nostradamus stated that the end of the world as we know it will be when such-n-such star alignment happens. And I heard in a Doc that yesterday was also the alignment he was speaking of. "Boarders will shift, old countries will fall and new countries will be born."

Well.. Shit is hitting the fan as I write. It looks like WWIII is about to begin and that we are headed for civil war. In the wake of all these shootings, Obama is now trying to undo the 2nd Amendment. And now Youtube is full of different extreme rightists, from Christians to Nazi's stating that all these shootings are a Government hoax and some are calling for citizens to rise up against the Government... What is even more scarey is that the evidence they are giving is pretty solid.

CMcillan... If you actually know someone who was effected by this, let us know. Because as of now... I am siding with the nut-jobs on this one.




But real or not... It looks like we might be heading down a dark road.

If this guy is right, then that is a smoking gun...

Tz,

I can tell you that what took Place in newtown was real.
I can Verify that they DID say that they found someone in the woods in Camo. This was reported on the local Radio Stations. Now we have not heard anything about the person found in the woods at all.
I recall that the local Radio DJ knew many First Responders from Newtown.
I do find it intresting as well how the Man in camo just left all topic of discussion.

What I am curious about is this.

Dark Knight (Movie shooter ) heavily armed. Possible on Medication as well. < Mailed a "Book" to his school about why
Newtown Shooter Heavily Armed Possibly on some kind of Medication. <Destroyed his HARD drive. He actually took it our and a screw driver and destroyed the Plates in the drive

What set both of these people off to specifically go into an area where they knew that NO one could stop them. GUN FREE ZONES.
Its intresting Conspiracy theories.
But I doubt we will know or find out.

Tz, this is too much. Step away from the computer. Drink some loaded eggnog and be merry. If you try, you will find many, many good and wonderful things in the world, too. I'm not saying to put your head in the sand, but do always question the motives of those that promote fear.

Every generation has seen predictions that doomsday was upon us, and could point to just as many horrible events in the world to base their claims. Yet here we are. Every generation felt THEY were the last worthwhile group, yet we've made truly astounding advances in just the past 20 years. On YouTube, check out the group called the Nerdfighters ~ a young, compassionate, generous and caring group that will restore your faith in the new generation.

Balance, grasshopper.

All i know is that this is creepy real or not.. And it is dangerous real or not. Even if there is no government conspiracy to ban guns, the extreme right seems to think they are.

My question is.. Did this really happen? Some of those Youtube posters made some very valid points.. Aside from the alleged parents not showing the right amount of grief, or the President, for that matter, or the coroner not seeming to know anything (When he was the one who should have known first.) One comment got to me.. The response from the Children. I remember when I was in second grade, a girl died of rocky mountain spotted fever. I did not know her as she was in the other class. (There were two classes per grade.. small school.) But I seen her around and it got to me. We were all balling our eyes out. None of these kids shed a tear. Surely that had to know someone who was killed, but instead they seemed excited to be on T.V.

The hysteria on youtube started off as some sort of cover-up. But yesterday the latest trend is that none of it happened. That all these shootings were a hoax to promote an all out gun-ban. I mean if your daughter was just murdered, would you be snickering before the interview like that guy was?

This is why I want to know if CM actually knows of someone that actually lost someone.. Did you see the part where the guys daughter's facebook page was only made four days prior?

What happened here in Portland (I live in Washington but I am in the Portland Metro area), what happened in Colorado, Michigan and not Connecticut all have one similarity. They were in an enclosed environment with no actual witnesses. All parties involved are deceased. Also remember about a week after the Colorado shooting, there was another theater shooting in which the guy was not charged? The news said he was an off-duty corrections officer and his gun accidentally discharged in a theater.

I am not saying that the situation is not real. All it would take is to fire blanks into a crowed and then everyone parts like the red sea ad every one will have a different story as to what went on. In all these cases there are no true eye-witnesses. Just people who heard the shots and ran or hid. Law enforcement would be called, and dispatches would be heard on police scanners.

Something is not right...

A very close friend's grandkids were pre-school classmates of two of the victims. The town, the children and the parents are devastated...not fake too real. Their dread in looking at the victim's list was all too real

"Obama wants to take our guns" Are you kidding me? Please cite one real example/ I see his administration as caving into to gun lobby's allowing more guns into national parks.

Does anyone except a paramilitary unit need more than 10 bullets in a magazine. Does any citiizen need high powered militarty style weapons to protect themselves. Has anyone ever successfully defended life or property because they had these weapons?

As technology advance the firepower becomes more incredible..not the muskets of the Revolutionary times...BTW" citizens couldn't possess canons and their canons are less powerful than amodern assult rifle.

MIB theory's are fun in Bigfoot...when its a belief carried throughout tragidies like this...it morphs into a paranoia that permeates a posion throughout our consciousness

My two cents

Myles, the point is the 2nd amendment is there for all Americans. I have two military type weapons for competition. Plus my saddle
rifle and my hand gun. I hope I dont need to defend my home but a handgun will only take care of one attacker. If there are more I would
need my other rifles. They are NOT automatic weapons.
The other point is that no matter WHAT tools are available SICK people are going to do what ever it takes to do EVIL. If guns were not available they would use explosives in suicide bombings just like in the middle east. OR poison gases or like in China Knives.
The first sign of tyranny is the government taking away liberties.
If you want a SOLID statistical example of what happens when the government goes awry is look at Australia. The Government banned guns and military rifles. What happened? Law abiding citizens turned in their weapons. Criminals now have an unarmed populace and homicides went up astronomically. Its happened OVER and OVER again.
The other problem we have here is the media as Morgan Freeman said: Send your condolences then your prayers but dont watch this stuff
OVER AND OVER again!!! The New puts this stuff in all our faces for WEEKS!!
Here is the truth, 90 people a DAY are KILLED in the US in traffic fatalities! thats THREE times more than what happened at NewTown and it happens EVERY DAY of EVERY MONTH of EVERY YEAR. Are you going to ban cars? Shootings like these happen every few years, and yet the government runs to ban weapons? for WHAT??? Because its on the NEWS? Its PURELY POLITICAL and thats IT!!
Because if you bann these weapons statistics prove over and over again, THE BAD GUYS DONT TURN IN THEIR GUNS!
Sure this would have worked 400 years ago but the cats out of the bag, our forefathers gave us the right, and put it in our Constitution,
because they knew what the human is, and the best way to keep a free people is to have an armed people. Its why Japan was NEVER going
to invade the US in WWII. THey knew the whole population is armed and so should it stay.

I don't think that the Video's are saying that the Killings were Faked.
I believe that they are saying that their was another motive for them.
Yes the children really died, The Principle as well. I know several People that went to her Funeral and Wake.
I know that the local Radio stations did talk about a second person. But this just went silent after a short time. WHY?
Was nothing saying they other person was not involved. Why was this other person in the woods with a gun near a school ? Hunting?

Our 2nd amendment was in place not for HUNTING.
It was specifically placed in there so IF ever our goverment becomes a Dictatorship the "WE the PEOPLE" will be able to rise up against the Goverment.
Our forefathers knew that WE the PEOPLE needed to have certain rights to protect ourselves from OUR goverment.

I do find it intresting the Conspiracy things associated with this Shooting and the Dark Knight movie shooting.

Taking away assult guns or even the ammo WILL NOT prevent what happen in NEWTOWN from Happening.

A person wanting to Kill WILL!

CMcMillan wrote:I don't think that the Video's are saying that the Killings were Faked.
I believe that they are saying that their was another motive for them.
Yes the children really died, The Principle as well. I know several People that went to her Funeral and Wake.
I know that the local Radio stations did talk about a second person. But this just went silent after a short time. WHY?
Was nothing saying they other person was not involved. Why was this other person in the woods with a gun near a school ? Hunting?

Our 2nd amendment was in place not for HUNTING.
It was specifically placed in there so IF ever our goverment becomes a Dictatorship the "WE the PEOPLE" will be able to rise up against the Goverment.
Our forefathers knew that WE the PEOPLE needed to have certain rights to protect ourselves from OUR goverment.

I do find it intresting the Conspiracy things associated with this Shooting and the Dark Knight movie shooting.

Taking away assult guns or even the ammo WILL NOT prevent what happen in NEWTOWN from Happening.

A person wanting to Kill WILL!

Oh.. I was putting them in wired orders, Cm.... At first it was the possibility that there was a cover-up. (This is from right after.) But now those very same people are saying they think it never happened. I hate to sort of put MyLeslie in the spotlight here, but he is pretty much stating what the media is showing... "I knew somebody who knew somebody." Those that claim they directly knew somebody are the ones with the crocodile tears.

As for "Does anyone need more than 10 rounds?" Try a couple of thousand. That right was put in place not just for personal protection, but protection of your country. Even though the Supreme Court is trying to say it is not, It cannot be more plainly written. The Supreme Court based their decision on the older pre-U.S. English law which had nothing to do with our own American version.

"AMENDMENT II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Damn where is the controversy? Looks plain as day to me. But then when you add in the Declaration of Independence "-That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

The confusion is mostly coming from the fact that our Government was Hi-jacked once already. We were never supposed to be a Federal System. So "The State" is literally looked at as "The people of this or that State." During our war for independence, Militia's were people of communities. They existed before the U.S. was ever established. This goes back even 200 years prior to the Revolution to the first colonists. They were the people of a community. There was no Army to protect from Native American raids. To survive, a community had to ally with Natives.. In doing so, you were made an enemy of their enemies.

The U.S. Army was actually created in 1775. (One year before the Declaration.) It was composed of a league of Militia's that were formed by the Continental Congress. So by the time the Brits landed in full force, we already had a Regular Army, but it was small and we repeatedly got our Butts kicked. Most of the Regular's were deserting simply because they could. All Washington had left were the Militia's that joined his cause. They were not deserting because in most cases, they were defending their own homes in that particular region. These people were not "State run" nor were they paid except in provisions.

There is no confusion about the 2nd Amendment once you realize that our Government was already Hi-jacked.. This is what actually lead to the civil war. (Not Slavery.) http://www.usconstitution.net/articles.html

We were set up to be a perpetual union, Not an actual one. Each State was to be it's own sovereign nation and was not to infringe on the rights of another State. No U.S. Laws were to be passed unless such laws were unanimous by all State representatives to Congress. Slavery was an issue, as the abolishment of it could not be passed unless there was a unanimous vote. But it was one of many issues and that topic never came up in regards to the war, until the middle of the war. The U.S. had France as an ally. The C.S. had Great Britain as an ally and trade partner.

The C.S. existed as a separate entity for nearly a year before the war and fired the first shot of the war when the North refused to evacuate Fort Sumter, which South Carolina declared belonged to them. Prior to that, the Union did not seem to care much about the Confederacy as far as military action.

In the Beginning, the war was a stalemate but in favor of the C.S. This is when the Slavery issue came out as propaganda and it worked. Britain stopped trading with the South, and the French aided in blockades of the Southern coastline. (Not the Union Navy. The South had the best short-ranged Navy in the world at that time and consisted of the majority of the former U.S. Navy) But it forced Jefferson Davis to write this to gain foreign support http://occawlonline.pearsoned.com/bookbind/pubbooks/divine5e/medialib/timeline/docs/sources/theme_primarysources_Slavery_19.html And it backfired

Anyway.. there you have it.. two U.S. Government conspiracies. The first was using Slavery to help cover a Federalist movement. The second is that they are covering this up still today. In common History Books, you won't see anything about the French involvement and when you do, it is barely touched on. Nor will you find that the vast majority of the South was against slavery but firm believers of States rights. (look up some of the letters of the time.) Only the rich were desperately clinging to the slavery issue but it was causing a class war. While plantation owners were getting richer, small farmers could not compete and there were no "jobs" for the poor. Now that the South no longer had anyone to sell their agricultural goods to, and had few factories of their own, Slaves went from being a commodity to a liability.

The next conspiracy hidden behind a "cause", was an imperial movement. "Manifest Destiny". It actually started way before the civil war and carried on way after, in which we started wars, committed genocide and basically took whatever we wanted because "God told us to do it." (But again, the cover-up and it gets even deeper this time. We are not taught about the real facts of Manifest Destiny. But it's evidence is not well hidden.. Instead, it's a sore thumb. Purposely trying to eradicate Native Americans by any means possible including Bio-weapons, Using my native Texas (Which was it's own country at the time.) as an excuse to take all of Mexico (But we gave some of it back just because we are nice guys lol) and then set up an attack on our own ship just so we could take all of back-water-Spain's empire.

It goes back to what George Santayana said... "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Now "Gun Control" is the cause and the movement is socialism. I think that these shootings being a hoax, is not so far fetched.

I stronger diasgree with your claim that you have the right and responsibility to inventory thousands of rounds.

The ammendment is not as gut and dry as you claim. Constitutional scholars disagree with the intent and there is no unanimity in this conversation. We parse it to fit our own interpretation.

Claims of emmerging socialism etc is lazy and thats's not something I ever felt about your posts.

We can disagree without name calling. The 1st amendment has limits why is the 2nd sacorsanct?

I am not going to follow this thread...like other areas of our politics...its not a healthy conversation..its name calling and no progress will be made...

I predict laws will be changed...the momentum is there and the idiotic protests of the NRA will galvanize the marority. Assalt rifles will be banned; magazines will be limited, armor piercing bullets will be banned.

No one will be conficating your hunting and personal protection weapons...however a large number of rifles and pistols will be banned

Merry Christmas

Few simple facts...followed by commentary:

A November 2012 Congressional Research Service report found that, as of 2009, there were approximately 310 million firearms in the United States: "114 million handguns, 110 million rifles and 86 million shotguns."

There are somewhere around 3,750,000 AR-15-type rifles in the United States today. That means these auto-loading assault-style rifles make up around 1 percent of the total arsenal. And keep in mind, the AR-15 is just one of the many assault weapons on the market.

Since 1982, there have been at least 62 mass murders* carried out with firearms across the country.

Of the 142 guns possessed by the killers, more than three quarters were obtained legally.

Of the 142 gun possessed by the killers...35 were assault weapons.

310 million firearms in personal possession around the country...62 mass murders in the last 30 years...35 assault weapons used. Do we really need legislation to restrict the 0.0000458% of weapons used to commit horrific crimes?

Yes...thats right...0.0000458% of the weapons owned are used to commit mass murders.

Horrific as they are, we do not need legislation.

...and how do you deal with potentially newly illegal weapons currently owned by people? What do we do with the 3.7 million AR-15s in personal collections once they are deemed weapons of mass destruction? Keep in mind that only 35 assault weapons have ever been used to commit mass murder.

MylesLI wrote:I stronger diasgree with your claim that you have the right and responsibility to inventory thousands of rounds.

The ammendment is not as gut and dry as you claim. Constitutional scholars disagree with the intent and there is no unanimity in this conversation. We parse it to fit our own interpretation.

Claims of emmerging socialism etc is lazy and thats's not something I ever felt about your posts.

We can disagree without name calling. The 1st amendment has limits why is the 2nd sacorsanct?

I am not going to follow this thread...like other areas of our politics...its not a healthy conversation..its name calling and no progress will be made...

I predict laws will be changed...the momentum is there and the idiotic protests of the NRA will galvanize the marority. Assalt rifles will be banned; magazines will be limited, armor piercing bullets will be banned.

No one will be conficating your hunting and personal protection weapons...however a large number of rifles and pistols will be banned

Merry Christmas

I am not calling you names, nor would I.. Obviously you are Liberal and that is your feeling, so stick to your guns on it. (errm wrong choice of words I guess but you know what I mean lol.)

But you made my point.. There should be no limit on the first amendment and initially, there wasn't one. The second amendment is VERY cut-n-dry, only Democrats are saying it is not because they have a not-so-hidden agenda to create a socialist Government. Assault rifles are exactly what the people need to keep the government in check.(The day those are banned is the day we will see civil-war.) There is no debate that Obama is trying to turn us into a socialists country.. Even your fellow Liberals know that because they want that. Each time a Democrat gets in office, we lose more civil Liberties, that is just a fact. When I was a kid, I could get in the car and close the door without having to ware a seat belt (Though my mother made me anyway.) My mother could drive to the store and send me in to get her a carton of Marlboro 100's with a $5 bill while she pumped the gas and the clerk would sell them to me because she could see I was buying them for my mother, and she would not get in trouble for it. If my mother got pulled over, had no insurance, was not buckled and I was not buckled, then she only got a ticket for why she was pulled over. No Inspection Sticker, No Insurance, no seat-belt, no car-seat for a child under 5, no Ticket because these were not laws back then. I was polite and respectful and never talked back to adults, or I would get my ass tore up.(Look at how well this timeout crap is working.) And now we are being forced to buy health-care?

No Government should infringe on the personal choice of it's people unless those choices effect others. And no Government should tell parents how to raise their children. But every time a Democrat is in office, they try to usurp the Government little by little.
Marijuana should not be illegal-Franklin D. Roosevelt Democrat
Cuban Cigars should not be illegal JFK Democrat
No one should be forced to buy health care. Barack Obama Democrat
No one should be forced to by Auto Insurance-Jimmy Carter Democrat
No one should be forced to ware a seat-belt-Jimmy Carter Democrat tried to get that law passed(but to be fair Ronald Regan still pushed to pass that bill. They stopped pressing the issue only after every state but one passed it as a state law)
U.S. Citizens were once denied Alcohol-Woodrow Wilson Democrat
Two terms is all a U.S. President is allowed to prevent to much political influence. Franklin D. Roosevelt Democrat served four! (Died on the forth term.)

We are not a free country anymore as it is. They want full authoritarian power and in order to achieve that, they must rid the second amendment which was put in place for that very reason.

Lets say they get what they want.. We are a full socialist country. How long before we have to pay to watch T.V. Like the U.K has to? (They are trying, that is why T.V. was switched from Analog to digital.) How long before we face forced abortions? Kiss your first Amendment goodbye as well.

Do you really think they care about this "Green Movement" or the environment, or Animal rights, or Gay rights, or any of their talking points? Hell no!, that is to get votes and once they are in, Animals are still being tested on, Offshore Oil is still being drilled and power-plants are still using coal.

The fact is that Alaska alone could pull us out of this recession, but of course they will not allow Oil Companies to drill there. They will need it once they achieve their goal of complete control over what was once Capitalistic Free Enterprise.

So you get two scenario's here once this happens.A) Best case is we wind up like Mexico where Government officials do as they please at the cost of their citizens well-being. Mexico has a complete Gun-ban and yet they have the worlds largest gun-crime.

B) Worse case Scenario, we get a Joseph Stalin running the country... Or an Adolf Hitler (Despite popular belief, Nazi's were first socialists and fascism is not possible without first having a socialistic platform.)

My former political party is no better (Republican.) They do not represent their voters anymore than Democrats do and because of George W Bush, we lost a few more civil liberties. They also have a hidden agenda.

If we went back to our roots (A Confederacy) none of this would be an issue. We could not become a socialist nation, nor could we become an imperialistic nation and our votes would actually count.

If you are a Liberal, yes as a conservative I do not agree with your ideology(Mostly) but I do not have a problem with it. It is the Parties that I have a problem with. Both are Lying to their voters(Or should I say Audience since our votes do not actually count) and both have their own agendas. The Parties themselves were usurped. Republicans pushed for the federal system, and were very Liberal while Democrats were very grass-roots, religious and conservative. How could they switch?

There were only two Presidents in the History of the U.S. who did everything they said they would do, and neither of them were Republican nor Democrat. Both had the well-being of the people at heart. George Washington and Theodore Roosevelt.

But back to the topic.. All of these shooting happen one by one this fast, All of them are in an enclosed environment with no witnesses and all of them have conflicting reports.. You do not find this coincidence odd?

DPinkerton wrote:Few simple facts...followed by commentary:

A November 2012 Congressional Research Service report found that, as of 2009, there were approximately 310 million firearms in the United States: "114 million handguns, 110 million rifles and 86 million shotguns."

There are somewhere around 3,750,000 AR-15-type rifles in the United States today. That means these auto-loading assault-style rifles make up around 1 percent of the total arsenal. And keep in mind, the AR-15 is just one of the many assault weapons on the market.

Since 1982, there have been at least 62 mass murders* carried out with firearms across the country.

Of the 142 guns possessed by the killers, more than three quarters were obtained legally.

Of the 142 gun possessed by the killers...35 were assault weapons.

310 million firearms in personal possession around the country...62 mass murders in the last 30 years...35 assault weapons used. Do we really need legislation to restrict the 0.0000458% of weapons used to commit horrific crimes?

Yes...thats right...0.0000458% of the weapons owned are used to commit mass murders.

Horrific as they are, we do not need legislation.

...and how do you deal with potentially newly illegal weapons currently owned by people? What do we do with the 3.7 million AR-15s in personal collections once they are deemed weapons of mass destruction? Keep in mind that only 35 assault weapons have ever been used to commit mass murder.

There is a good reason for that. If you want to commit mass-murder, Assault Rifles are a poor choice. You have a max of 32 rounds and the legal civilian versions such as the AR-15 are automatic... Not fully automatic and most people do not understand the difference. These are not Machine guns (Nor is an M-16 or an M-4 for that matter.) Autmatic means you point and pull the trigger per round, instead of having to cock the weapon. Fully Automatic means you hold the trigger and the rounds keep coming. Our modern Military weapons are no longer fully automatic and the reason is that it wastes your ammo. Instead they are now 3-round bursts. (You hold the trigger and no more than three rounds are disbursed.) The only reason we have that is for suppressive fire. (To keep the enemies head down while you move.)

If you are going to go postal, in a close quarters area, the LAST weapon you will want is an assault rifle. Those were designed for long range combat, not close quarters. (This is why when I was in the Army, they were phasing out the M-16A2 for the M-4 Carbine which was the same weapon, but with a collapsible Butt-stock) The weapon that would be the most effective is the very one that no body is talking about.. A simple Shot-gun. First of all, the shooter is not going to care about the law, he is going to saw off the barrel so that the pellets spread out and hit multiple targets per shot. That is the only legal weapon that could do the job. Other than that, we are talking HIGHLY-Illegal assault weapons that are fully automatic designed for close-quarters. Modified MAC-10's, Uzi's, MP-5's Thompsons.. The Sub-Machine-guns.

This is all the more reason for me to think this is indeed a hoax.. They can't even get what weapon was used right. And since when does every kid sit still? There is no way he could have killed an entire class with the weapons they say he had. After the first shot, all hell would have broke lose and the children would have been running in every direction. The hardest target to hit is a moving one and since all of his weapons were legal, as the media is stating, none of them would have been full-auto. And this guy supposedly had Aspergers? For those of you that do not know, Aspergers is a mild form of autism and those that have it, tend to sway from side to side when they are standing. (I know three different people who were diagnosed with it, one being an ex-girlfriend and they all do this.) So I don't even think he could aim at a stationary target.

This does not look good

This is only my opinions I'm stating here-
Having been through lock down drills Tz I can guarantee you that all the children were in one place in a room. I'll be glad to explain that in a pm or we can start a thread about this but there is no doubt this is real.

I understand where you are coming from as to the loss of more and more rights. Now let me explain another point of view.

The seat belt laws I fully support after working with one to many brain injured children that had been tossed through to into the windshield of a car. As far as I'm concerned the seat belt laws were passed to protect Innocent children from irresponsible parents.

You referred to the time you could go buy cigarettes for your mom etc. That was a much different time. I don't mind the legal age limit on tobacco and liquor.

One of the more troublesome things to me is that we have young men and women fighting in the service who are old enough to fight on the front lines but not old enough to drink???

As far as automobile insurance, yes sireee if you ram into the back of my car because you're not paying attention I expect you to pay for fixing it, since that didn't happen before mandatory insurance without going to court I think it's a good thing.

A lot of the things happening today is the direct result of the disintegration of the family unit. You were polite and respectful because you knew what would happen if you didn't. A lot of kids today don't even live with Dad and sometimes Mom but often with Grandparents who are just doing the best they can.

I will say that the larger percentage of parents who came to school were upset because the child told them the teacher expected them to do something and wanted to hold the child accountable and the parents were furious. Why did their child have to be held accountable? and....oh my at the excuses they gave to support little Johnny and not the teacher. Gone are the days when the parent said, you just let me know if he/she gives you any trouble.

There are more single parent homes. There are less fathers in the home and involved in their children's lives.

It can't all fall into the categories you're talking about. It's just not that easy.

Now about the Ct shooting and the theater shooting. I don't know. I think a conspiracy is possible and I do think that there would be ways for it to happen. Adam Lanza sure did not want anyone accessing his computer.

I do think there was a possibility that someone could tell these isolated mentally ill people what to do through suggestion etc. There is so much evil going on in this world and mind games that we know about much less what we don't. I know that mind control has been practiced by our military and how else can you explain "sleepers".

I know people think this is to get gun control initiated. But, Adam's guns were legally purchased. You and I both know we can get a gun anytime from sources that cannot be traced, just like criminals do.

Trust me Tz Connecticut was not a hoax it was real and Santa was not able to deliver presents he had already purchased for so many.

The theater shooting guy and Adam Lanza were definitely mentally ill. In the 80's mental institution closed their doors and mentally ill populations all over the nation had their mental health care terminated. I remember the head of my graduate program telling us in class that this would have severe ramifications for the future. What we need to do is advocate for Mental Health care. That is more the need than an impossible to enforce gun control.

I will be happy to tell you how lock downs work and why I think Adam went to the specific school rooms where he had been placed when he was younger and attended that school.(The classrooms he shot the children in were his former classrooms.)

There was so much confusion when it first happened even the first responders did know everything. There is something I seriously want to know. What happened to the 2 or 3 guys they arrested on the scene that we have heard nothing about. Were they hunting illegally? Were they cutting wood? Will we ever know?

PM me if you want to know how lock down works in a school or let me know here and I'll be glad to share. It was terrifying for me to sit through the in-service when the deputies came out and showed us the video then identified proper procedure. Then we practiced! I was so upset I knew it was time for me to retire. I lasted two years after that but let me assure you of something...
The world we live in today is not the world of your youth or mine (which would have been 40-50 yrs ago for me) when you were buying cigs for your mom and I thought nothing of walking from school or home to town.

I wish it could all boil down to Democrats vs Republicans etc but it's so much more than that and it is like an oozing sore getting bigger and bigger.

I do not agree with the conspiracy theories or the right and left wing commentary flying around, and I do not want to be part of those particular points.

But I would like to comment and provide a few facts on guns (Tzieth touched on some of this) that seem to escape the majority of the media and masses.

The term “assault” rifle is very misleading (sensationalism) by the media and politicians. “Assault” weapons are fully automatic and are heavily regulated and have been since the 1930s. The civilian manufacturing of these assault weapons has been outlawed for a long time.

The civilian AR-15 and AK-47 rifles (and similar type weapons) are NOT the same automatic weapons that are used in the military’s around the world. The military has fully automatic weapons (machine gun). The civilian AR-15s and AK-47’s in production today are semi automatic. They shoot one shot per trigger pull, just like a semi auto hunting rifle.

I know the media often makes commentary while showing a B-roll video in the background of a machine gun shooting and spraying, but that is NOT how the civilian versions work. The civilian versions have the same type of internals as your semi auto rifle. Civilian type "assault" rifles function the exact same way as hunting rifles, they just have a military look to them.

These civilian AR-15 and AK-47 rifles are not “high powered”. The AR-15 shoots some of the smallest rifle cartridges on the market and the AK-47 isn’t any more powerful than the majority of the standard deer rifles.

If the argument is to be made, then let everyone stand on common ground to begin with, knowledge is the first step.
I personally disagree with any new legislation that restricts the second amendment.

YSPR is correct, I have an AR15. If I was mentally ill and wanted to cause as much damage as I could, out of my
3 rifles and one handgun, it would be the LAST weapon I would choose. It has a small bullet a .223 and a high exit
velocity somewhere around 2000 feet per second. The bullets are around what a .22 looks like. Its an even worse problem
of why people dont like to carry 9mm. Its a small(ER) bullet with a high muzzle velocity. The 9mm hasnt the stopping power
that other guns have like a .45. The .223 will just go through things and not cause as much damage. Its good for target shooting
thats why I have mine and varmint plinking. Thats it. I have a .30/30 Saddle rifle is much better in stopping things as is my .45.
So not only does the MEDIA have it wrong, so do the Politicos. Since they have NO gun knowledge as they have demonstrated over
and over and over again, they have just glommed on to a catch phrase and they are ACTING by GOD. Even though they dont know
what theyre doing now Feinstein is pushing a bill that says there is a $400 Tax on a AR15, and you sign a waiver giving up your 4th amendment right so you can be searched by the ATF any time they want. Yea thats REAL american. When they find out 100 Americans
die everyday on the roads when will they come after our cars.
Those of you who dont believe these people in Washington are idiots all you have to do is look at this piece of legislation. Waive your 4th Amendment rights to have a little varmit gun. A gun that is hard to reload because of the bullet button. You have to use a tool to remove the magazine. Yea it looks cool and you can accessorize it like a purse, but its NOT the weapon you would choose. Plus ONCE they get
rid of guns these school shootings are going to be school obliterations by bombs. Because thats what the Batman shooter would have done
because the TNT was in his apartment

This is what happens to countries that have banned guns...

"Knife crime cuts a global trail

A spate of fatal knife attacks in the UK has sparked a debate about youth violence and gang culture in the country. But is the UK's experience mirrored in other nations? BBC correspondents compare situations around the world.
DANNY WOOD, SPAIN
Spain's Ministry for the Interior does compile separate statistics for knife crimes, but not because crimes with knives are on the rise.
According to government statistics, 135 people died from knife injuries in 2007 and nearly 488,000 knives were confiscated by police.
Those figures do not represent any significant change compared to previous years and guns remain the preferred lethal weapon.
Any worries about knife crime in Spain tend to be overshadowed by other crime concerns, like violent burglaries by gangs, including Russian and Eastern European groups. They are known to target wealthy residential areas and often use firearms to threaten their victims.
Knife related violence can feature among Spanish and Latin American street gangs who are seen by some as a growing urban problem.
Some reports in the media suggest that violence involving knives - especially resulting from fights among teenagers and young men - has increased dramatically in recent years.
But in that context, there is not a wave of knife crime and it does not seem to overly preoccupy the authorities or the wider community.
CHRIS HOGG, TOKYO
In Japan there is great concern about what is perceived to be a rising level of knife crime. In June a man ran amok in a Tokyo shopping district, killing seven people and injuring seven more, stabbing his victims with a double edged hunting knife. Sadly, such incidents are not as unusual here as they once were.

Seven died when a knifeman ran amok in Tokyo
Newspaper reports say the National Police Agency is now considering whether carrying a double-edged knife should be outlawed. These knives are often depicted in Japanese video games. The fear is that the games make them popular with young people.
Japanese law already prohibits people from carrying a knife with a blade 6cm (2.4in) or longer unless they have a good reason to have it, although it's not illegal to possess a knife that long.
Reports suggest that in 2007 there were 40% more knife crimes than there were five years earlier. But the numbers were still pretty low compared to other countries - fewer than 5,000 violations of the knife crime law in a country of more than 127 million people.
JANE LYONS, NEW YORK
New York City has a reputation for being an edgy, sometimes dangerous city. But in fact it is one of the safest big cities in the United States. Over the past 10 years violent crime has fallen by 41%. Murder rates in the city are currently at their lowest rate since 1963.
Like other dangerous weapons, carrying a knife in New York City is illegal, but knives are not perceived as being a specific problem on New York City streets. Efforts to stop violent crime here tend to focus more on guns, and the legislation to restrict their sale and possession.
The most recent tactic that the New York City Police Department (NYPD) has used against violent and petty crime is called Operation Impact. It focuses on targeting crime on a very local level, sending lots of police officers to very specific trouble spots such as housing estates or shopping malls.
JULIAN ISHERWOOD, COPENHAGEN
In Denmark there are strict rules as to the length of knives that can be carried in public and police have broad powers to search individuals without due cause.
At a maximum length of 7cm (2.7 inches), almost all sharp instruments that can be used to stab are forbidden in public places.
The rules do not apply to certain trades, such as fishermen or others who require knives as the tools of their profession.
However, tradesmen are advised to leave any sharp tools elsewhere when visiting pubs or public places, and are liable to be fined if knives, screwdrivers or other instruments cannot be proved to be necessary at a location.
Call for CCTV
Copenhagen and other major cities have been designated as special search areas where police have the right to institute body searches at any time.
At the same time, Justice Minister Lene Espersen has suggested that police introduce more CCTV to stop crime - particularly knife crime.
Despite these measures, however, the level of crime in which knives are involved has remained the same - 2-3% of all violent crime - according to figures from the Crime Prevention Council.
An unfortunate development, according to police, is that when knives are available they are used more frequently and with more devastating effect.
Latest figures show that 2,549 illegal knives were confiscated in 2007, while 3,113 were confiscated in 2006.
RICHARD GALPIN, MOSCOW
Knife crime has not been singled out so far by Russian authorities or the population in Moscow as being a particular problem.
Instead, the Ministry of Interior provides country-wide statistics apparently showing that the number of crimes committed using a weapon of any kind dropped by almost a third in the first half of 2008 - taking the total to fewer than 5,000 incidents.
But this extremely low figure does not tally with what non-governmental organisations investigating specific types of crime are finding from their research.
Take for example the latest figures from Sova, a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which focuses on racist violence in Russia.
Racist murders
It says the number of racist attacks is increasing by 15-20% every year.
From January to May this year, 59 people were murdered and more than 200 injured.
Most of these racist murders were in Moscow and most involved the use of knives.
The police themselves admit that knives are the weapons of choice for gangs of skinheads.
And yet in Russia there is no clear legislation banning the carrying of knives on the streets.
HUGH SCHOFIELD, PARIS
France has seen no equivalent of the wave of fatal stabbings in Britain, and newspaper reports on the so-called "culture du poignard" (knife culture) reigning in London and other big cities are read with universal horror.
But experts warn there is no cause for complacency. Where Britain has gone, France could all too easily follow.
According to Alain Bauer, France's leading criminologist, the carrying of knives and other weapons by adolescents is widespread in many poor neighbourhoods.
And if the number of murders nationwide remains relatively low (on average around 1,000 a year, of which only about 35 by minors), there has been a huge increase recently in acts of violence carried out by minors.
Gang culture
"One big difference here is that our gang culture is directed mainly against representatives of the state. In Britain, it is more internecine," says Mr Bauer.
"In general, here in France we haven't reached the point where knife-carriers move to the actual deed. But it's probably only a question of time."
According to Mr Bauer, Western societies are all caught in a similar pattern of youth violence, which he says is linked to a collapse of confidence in authority.
"Across the West, we have a set of moral references that date from the 18th century, 19th century laws, 20th century police - and 21st century violence," he says."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7508418.stm

"29th December 2008 - New Knife Crime Statistics have today been released by the Conservative Party
As reported on UK National TV News Channels The Conservative Party have today released new details of fatal stabbing statistics based on information apparently obtained from the police in England and Wales under the Freedom of Information Act.

The new figures indicate that in the year 2007-8 there were some 277 deaths from stabbings in England & Wales alone (the highest recorded figure for 30 years). This represents an average death toll as a direct result of stabbings of over 5 for every week of the year!

In an immediate response, the government have challenged the figures which they state they believe to be misleading as the figures may not be confined to fatal stabbings with knives alone!

Obviously, if the newly released figures are correct, despite claims by the government to have been tough on knife crime during their lengthy period in office, it is estimated that knife crime has increased by around 38%? - a figure with which they also take issue.

So is Knife Crime in the UK "Up" or "Down"?
- well frankly given that politicians (sadly across all political parties) seldom offer a concise and straight answer to any question, it's hard to know.

When listening to the governments carefully worded response to any hint of an escalation in UK knife crime however, time and again, the answer somehow seems to skirt the core of the question. The response normally includes a statement about some tough new measures "about to be introduced" to make our streets safer and some form of comment to the effect that overall violent crime is down! ...the cynical amongst you could however be forgiven for wondering if even that is true, or if that itself could be anything to do with how crimes are classified and which are actually recorded.

When it comes to reducing knife and gun crime, patently, weapons amnesties and lightweight community service sentences for those caught carrying a weapon are having little real effect on the problem. In fact there appears to be a growing anger and resentment amongst the general public at the governments continued commitment to tough words but limp action.

Those dealing with the issues on the ground within the community have long been saying that the growing weapons culture and the easy willingness to use them is a symptom of deep rooted problems in our society. Poverty, lack of opportunity, the "must have now" culture (fuelled by the easy access to credit - even to those unable to afford it), the growing divide between the rich and poor, the break down of family values and discipline, are just some of the issues which probably have to be tackled if we are really going to solve the problem. Such a cultural change may take a generation or two to achieve, but unless we get started, things are likely to get a lot worse before they get better." http://www.insight-security.com/facts-knife-crime-stats.htm

As for the U.S. I can't find the Knife Crime Stats as this seems to be done per State and not as a whole, unlike with guns. But it seems to be irrelevant because Knives are not the weapon of choice for murders in the U.S. nor (despite what the movies tell us), are they the weapon of Choice for U.S. Serial killers. Possibly because in a Nation where anyone could be packing a firearm, if you stab someone, they are libel to pull out 38 special from their purse, or Colt 1911 from their nightstand and shoot you.

Weapon of choice for murder in the U.S. is also not firearms and of all firearms, definitely not rifles Assault nor hunting... Baseball Bats, and Hammers beat out murder by firearm in the U.S.

"According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.
This is an interesting fact, particularly amid the Democrats' feverish push to ban many different rifles, ostensibly to keep us safe of course.
However, it appears the zeal of Sens. like Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) is misdirected. For in looking at the FBI numbers from 2005 to 2011, the number of murders by hammers and clubs consistently exceeds the number of murders committed with a rifle.
Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.
And so the list goes, with the actual numbers changing somewhat from year to year, yet the fact that more people are killed with blunt objects each year remains constant.
For example, in 2011, there was 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs.
While the FBI makes is clear that some of the "murder by rifle" numbers could be adjusted up slightly, when you take into account murders with non-categorized types of guns, it does not change the fact that their annual reports consistently show more lives are taken each year with these blunt objects than are taken with Feinstein's dreaded rifle.
Another interesting fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles.
The bottom line: A rifle ban is as illogical as it is unconstitutional. We face far greater danger from individuals armed with carpenters' tools and a caveman's stick.
And it seems fairly obvious that if more people had a gun, less people would be inclined to try to hit them in the head with a hammer." http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/03/FBI-More-People-Killed-With-Hammers-and-Clubs-Each-Year-Than-With-Rifles

Do you all know that the government will not do anything with any Ban on weapons that would really mean anything?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolynmcclanahan/2012/07/23/gun-owner-rights-and-obamacare-yes-it-is-in-the-law/

http://www.pennydean.org/content/how-nra-helped-obamacare

http://www.redstate.com/briansikma/2012/06/28/how-the-nra-helped-obamacare/

NRA has Provisions in the Obamacare.
I think most Americans don't really get even the democratic congress the NRA has many of them in there back pocket.
If something drastic happens with Guns then the NRA will put pressure on Congress and Senate to repeal Obamacare.

OMG ROFLMAO... Sorry but this is funny. I was wanting to know just how many countries have a total gun ban so that I could compare their crime rait. But one of those Q&A's popped up. It is as if this sort of stat is hidden from the general public... But the Q&A was funny.

Some person called "Militant Atheist Communist" (Go figure lol) wrote this:

Resolved QuestionShow me another »
"Why are countries with gun bans so peaceful?
It is about time we repealed the 2nd amendment (without a vote, too many red states would vote against it and we can't have progress with red states getting in the way)

Many countries have banned guns -

Russia - since 1929
Turkey - since 1911
Germany - since 1938
China - since 1949
Guatemala - since 1964
Uganda - since 1970
Cambodia - since 1956"
8 months ago

Then before I got the urge to check, someone gave back a "Duh!" type answer lol

Someone named Yanceyd, replied with the highest rated answer which was this:

"Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

Couple of points there,
1. Every country you listed has had some type of genocide or mass killings by the government so have a hard time buying that point
2. The violent crime rate in some of the countries that have restrictive gun laws are on par or higher than the US, we just have more gun related.
To review that point please refer to Guy Smiths book, "Shooting the Bull" that gives some statistical data to back up the violent crime rates."
8 months ago
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120517144603AA0yh1L

Sorry, I know this should not be funny, but this person pretty much made the point of why we NEED the 2nd Amendment lol

Doll Looked at the numbers in another forum she posts at

Number of violent crimes per 100,000 people:

UK - 2,034
Australia - 1,677
South Africa - 1,609
Sweden - 1,123
Belgium - 1,006
Canada - 935
Finland - 738
Netherlands - 676
Luxemburg - 575
France - 504

And down somewhere below is the United States at 386 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

Total crime percent per country (Number of crimes / Population):

US - 3.7%
UK - 10.3%
Germany - 7.9%
France - 5.6%

Yes we have twice the crimes that the UK does...but the UK has one fifth the population.

People love to claim we have more guns and more Violence but the 2 don't equal

CMcMillan wrote:Doll Looked at the numbers in another forum she posts at

Number of violent crimes per 100,000 people:

UK - 2,034
Australia - 1,677
South Africa - 1,609
Sweden - 1,123
Belgium - 1,006
Canada - 935
Finland - 738
Netherlands - 676
Luxemburg - 575
France - 504

And down somewhere below is the United States at 386 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

Total crime percent per country (Number of crimes / Population):

US - 3.7%
UK - 10.3%
Germany - 7.9%
France - 5.6%

Yes we have twice the crimes that the UK does...but the UK has one fifth the population.

People love to claim we have more guns and more Violence but the 2 don't equal

Good job on finding that CM.. I looked but the states were sort of hidden. They were given in a different way making it near impossible to differentiate gun violence vs non-firearm violence. But with the knife violence that I found has been sweeping Europe, I did find it funny how they throw in their opinion "But the criminals prefer guns." lol Did they do a survey asking criminals what their weapon of choice was? 4 out of five violent criminals prefer Guns over the leading weapon of choice" lol

It should tell you something when we do have guns on hand, but our own murder intended criminals prefer blunt objects over firearms. More personal and harder to trace.

Well.. Now that I know you trolls are viewing this

AnonymousThursday, January 24, 2013 at 10:02:00 PM PST
Yes, go to the forum where you can join the rest of the choir without any fear of reason or sanity creeping in.


AnonymousThursday, January 24, 2013 at 10:04:00 PM PST
Yes, go to the forums and read Tzieth's crazy conspiracy theories about the New Town Sandyhook shootings. Great fun reading his strange ramblings about a so called "false flag" event staged by the Obama administration. And I am quite sure that you will thoroughly enjoy Tzieth's analysis of video of grieving parents who just lost their children not acting "appropriately" in his opinion.

Thank you for reminding me that I need to address this issue again. Before, there was a lot of confusion... Now I am at the point to where I am 100% sure this is either a hoax, or a small shooting that was made out to be bigger than it truly was. And now The media is getting defensive???


By the way, as for my opinion on how grieving parents should behave? I hope you took close note of the father who lost his grown son in Afghanistan... Notice the heaves? So if the reactions of the parents are not "acting" then what? is the whole town full of sociopaths?

But then again, explain this


This "Documentary" is basically a compilation of everything wrong with Sandy Hook to date. But aside from that, all you naive idiots that like to shout out "Conspiracy Theorists"... You should have paid attention during your history class. "Propaganda" is the first stage of a true conspiracy. The first thing that an occupying nation does is take over all media outlets. Flyers, Newspapers and finally television. It works because people are generally stupid and believe what they hear on the news and don't even consider that deep down everyone is biased. But the true red flag comes when ALL media outlets start stressing one opinion such as "Gun Control" to where you would think everyone in the country actually wants this.. Yet read all through these forums and look at the majority feeling of that issue. What is wrong with this picture?


No one finds it odd how the media is ALL incompetent in reporting this, yet ALL seems to have the same agenda?