nra (22)

  4063643739?profile=original   Adam Lanza's mental illness claimed the lives of his mother and innocent school victims

There was a fear moving across the American heartland long before Adam Lanza stepped onto the nation’s stage and donned the dark murderous mass killer robe. This 20-year-old joined the unique club of notable mass murderers that used a gun as a weapon of slaughter. After his onslaught the gun control hysteria surrounding stricter legislation has risen to a fever pitch.

Why purposely avoid holding the gunman’s mental instability responsible? Should any dangerous behavior factors or legislation that could have been in place to prevent this terrible murderous outbreak be considered? What if there had been a 'Three Strike Rule' in place for Adam Lanza, which allowed automatic involuntary commitment by mental health authorities? Mothers, fathers and siblings need this kind of solution that will not make them the next horrific headline in America’s homes.

This rapid rush to judgment and instant condemnation of guns as the casual factor for the mindless killings by a disturbed gunman is just too convenient a straw man. Adam Lanza was the killer. Adam Lanza, according to Fox News reports, was upset that his mother was going to commit him for psychiatric treatment. And it was Adam Lanza that constructed the plan to destroy his computer to remove any evidence concerning his plan to murder.

Yet, it has been the mainstream media, along with the urgency of the gun control first responders to keep overlooking the obvious. This disturbed gunman may have used guns as weapons to kill, but it was his mental illness that was the true deadly assault weapon!

It is essential that the loss of such precious young children, teachers and Adam Lanza’s mother Nancy not be buried in the grave, while the true culprit to their senseless murders is ignored. Adam Lanza, a mentally disturbed young man, stole three legally registered weapons to commit his crimes the emphasis is on legal.

The actual crimes were formulated in his head and his conduct, unrestrained by possible intervention of law enforcement or mental health authorities, that became the deadly weapon.

So, why do politicians want to dismember the constitutional right to arm and protect the life of an individual or a family? These officials and gun control advocates are afraid to tackle the hard question and solution to this outrage. They absolutely refuse to hold the individual who had a mental illness, and has shown previous signs, of forceful dangerous behavior responsible for his actions.

Instead, this endless cat and mouse game is played on the national stage by congress, state legislatures, and mayors like Michael Bloomberg who hide behind their own protective guards and trained security. These first responders of gun rights denouncers are disingenuous. They purport to seek a conversation on what can safeguard society’s innocents, but denounce attacks on Hollywood movies and violent video games which savage the young minds of young children thousands of times a year.

These same gun control activists do not seek cooperation or genuine discussion but would rather demonize gun rights supporters and castrate the National Rifle Association (NRA) at every given opportunity.

On Friday, December 21st, when Wayne LaPierre, the NRA’s Executive Vice President advanced proposals at the Washington D.C. Press conference, the mainstream media and gun rights opponents trivialized his comments.

( click to read more )

Read more…

I recently sent this link out to a number of friends.   

 I know some of them are very conservative, some are liberal, some are military, some are teachers and college professors.  I expected to hear the whole gamut of comments.  One of the most disturbing is from, an otherwise intelligent, retired college professor, a PhD.    

Below is what he said, and my reply.  What do you think?  We had all better prepare ourselves for these conversations.  Our politicians can't agree to fix the tax code, cut spending, or balance a budget; but they rammed through Obamacare and they are building support to ram through their unconstitutional restrictions on gun ownership.

Sent: Mon, Dec 17, 2012 5:21 pm
Subject: Re: Breeding Ground for School Shooter

I respect your opinion, but I disagree.
 
First: the term "assault rifle" is a vague misnomer.  Any rifle can be an assault weapon.  For the military, their "assault rifles" are capable of firing AUTOMATICALLY or in 3 shot bursts.  The civilian versions, while similar in "appearance", have no such capability. The civilian versions operate just like any other semi-automatic rifle.
 
Second: Our 2nd Amendment, like our 1st, does not have "qualifiers".  In fact it specifically states that it is an unalienable right meaning, the government did not grant us this right; it is a right derived by virtue of being born a free person.  It also stipulates that the government may NOT restrict that right.  We already allow certain restrictions by permitting background checks, and limiting military weapons to either the military or police, or in rare occassions individuals who go through a lengthy permitting process and pay the government a license fee.  No average, everyday citizen, crazy or not, has access to those types of weapons.
 
Third:  Even though I may not desire to own an AR-15 or AK-47 "style" of rifle, I detest some bureaucrat telling me that, as a free, law abiding, sane, citizen that I am not trustworthy enough to own one.  They, nor you, have that right, just as no one has the right to tell me which church to go to or what newspaper to buy. 
 
Fourth:  Having a weapon, of choice, that an individual is competent at shooting, is EXACTLY the point.  It does have a direct relationship on a person's "self-defense", the AR style rifles ARE indeed used in hunting, sport shooting, competitve/recreational shooting.  In fact, they are one of the most widely used guns in America today.
 
Fifth:  Your comment: "People who would buy such weapons are precisely the ones we don't want 
to have them."
  Is not only inaccurate, but displays a lack of understanding of the real underlying causes for these tragedies.  As stated previously, many, sane, competent, decent, law abiding Americans currently own these rifles and enjoy using them for a variety of lawful purposes; the guns, their caliber,  their capacity, nor their appearance are the problem.  These shootings did not happen because the shooter had an AR-15; they happened because the shooter was, for whatever mental or emotional reason, not acting rationally and committed a heinous crime while breaking the existing laws.
  More laws will not fix the problems with evil, crazy, irrational behavior.
 
I am saddened, and sickened by the carnage this single person inflicted on so many families.  Like most people who see it, I am angry.  Rationally, I realize, I cannot be angry at the gun or the millions of Americans who choose to own and use that type of gun in their own "pursuit of happiness" that is guaranteed under our constitution.  I am ANGRY as hell at a society that fails to place the blame where the blame should be; on the individual who committed the crime, and his family and friends who supported him and enabled him.  I am ANGRY that the American culture has declined to such a state that we no longer mourn the deaths of millions of unborn babies by abortion; in fact, we elected a man to the Presidency who not only supported late term abortion, he voted for and even went so far as stating that an aborted late term baby, that happens to survive, should be left to die because that was the mother's intent.  Talk about callous!  Talk about insensitive!  Talk about disgusting!
 
I am also saddened that intelligent people, such as yourself, are inclined to accept a knee jerk reaction, which will not solve the real causes of much deeper societal problems of mental health, drug abuse, etc.
 
We have some really serious problems in society today.  We should be brave enough to face the facts that several generations of permissiveness  decaying moral values, political correctness, drugs, and the destruction of the traditional family are more at fault than a specific type of firearm.  There have been guns around for centuries.  True, until the 20th century we didn't have high capacity, weapons, but we have had semi-automatics since the early 20th century and it has only been in the past couple of decades that we've seen this level of violence perpetrated on our most vulnerable citizens.  Rather than rushing to judge those who legally own, and lawfully use, these weapons, I would encourage you to get involved in a meaningful investigation and dialogue to put the blame where it should be and begin to change society's value system rather than restrict a free American's constitutional right to keep the arms he or she chooses will best suit them.
 
Bill

 

Read more…