Tuesday Night Open Thread

Who will win The Voice? I hope it's Terry McDermott. I voted several times.

More people who once upon a time knew Adam Lanza are speaking out. They don't seem to know anything more than anyone else. I'm always sorry after I click on one of these articles, only to realize it's pure speculation. And most of them have annoying automatically playing videos you have to search for to shut off.

The Washington Post documents the media errors. I have a similar post I wrote over the weekend and haven't gotten around to publishing yet. And another one on Nancy Lanza and her family. And another on the lack of any connection between Asperger's, Autism and violence. (The New York Times on that here and here.) I will finish them soon, they are just very detailed and need a lot of proofreading.

Gun control is still the talk of the nation.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Judge Uses Good Faith Exception to Save Cell Site Data Search | Obama Names Task Force for Gun Law Changes >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Another a$$hole with a gun in Florida (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by shoephone on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:31:46 AM EST
    tries to claim "Stand Your Ground" as his defense for shooting an unarmed man next to him in line at a pizza joint. See, the unarmed man was whining that it was taking too long for his pizza to arrive, so, obviously, the macho man with a gun was forced to start a fight with him. And then he shot him. Luckily, the victim is still alive. And the police didn't buy Mr. Macho Man's "Stand Your Ground" excuse. (Additionally, he lied to the cops that the other guy had a weapon.)


    If only everyone in line had been packing (5.00 / 7) (#4)
    by caseyOR on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:19:16 AM EST
    heat. Then there would have been someone to shoot the original shooter and someone to shoot the second shooter and so on and so on.

    That would have cut down on the (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by observed on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:46:11 AM EST
    unauthorized use of weapons, for sure!

    Not to mention (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by easilydistracted on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:42:08 AM EST
    speeding up the pizza line, too.

    Beware of simplistic stories (2.00 / 1) (#131)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:38:12 PM EST
    I'm not justifying the shooter, but it was a little more than that. The victim was complaining loudly about the employees and his late pizza. The shooter told him to stop. They yelled at each other, and the victim shoved the shooter. The shooter said the victim was going to punch him when he pulled out his gun. Then they started fighting physically. This is from the Tampa Bay Times.  

    If the coward... (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 09:39:17 AM EST
    didn't have a piece, it's a simple donnybrook and everybody lives.  It is that simple.

    The guy maybe deserved a convincer to the chin, not a bullet.  Glad you're not justifying it, because there is no justification.

    I don't remember so many cowards when I lived in FLA...wtf is going on down there Suzie?


    kdog, I am not Suze (none / 0) (#169)
    by Amiss on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 09:36:01 AM EST
    But maybe I can shed a little light, but certainly not explain it fully. I was born and grew up in Florida. It is mostly my belief that the " Inmates have taken over the institution " as the saying goes
    Those inmates are led by a horrendous governor, Rick Scott whose approval rating is at 36%. How anyone could have voted this guy in is just incomprehensible. I believe "the machine" I guess it could be named "put" him in office, "a machine" led by the top 2%.
    This is not the Florida I grew up in. I moved away for a few years and this is what I came home to.It is like night and day in the changes that have taken place. I grew up and lived most of my life with good "Democrats" governing. Then we started getting every refugee being shipped here. Please do not misunderstand, I am all for immigration, but it should be evenly distributed, not all of the naivity put in one place like what was done to Florida. Those old enough to remember Viet Nam may remember the tent city just plopped down here at once. Cubans and Haitians after that. But even earlier than Viet Nam was the "gift" Castro sent us a mass criminal element to rid Cuba of its criminal element, good idea on Fidel's part when communism took over Cuba and making his "new country" "look good and appealing". I amnotblaming the people, but we were overwhelmed with the un-educated "rejects" (according to the respective countries). We were and are being overwhelmed with immigrants that are "ignorant" that the people of Florida were ill-equipped to handle all at one time. Add to that the new homeless citizens coming down, because the weather is much better if you are forced to live on the street and a changed state government of repugs who don't care about humanity and this is what you get.
    Florida was not prepared nor equipped to handle these changes in such a short time.
    Now it is led by an "alleged" criminal himself and a virtual chaos of sorts is taking place. It is so bad that a former repug governor is now a democrat that is so far up Obama's arse that he knows when he is going to fa*t before the president does. The rumors are that Crist will run for governor, this time as a "democrat".
    It was not just one event, but a combination of many that has changed a state I once loved, I didn't think I could live without it's "sand in my shoes". It is no longer that place and I am not young enough to deal with the inmates of the asylum.
    I hope this makes some sense and it doesn't make me come across as a "prejudicial arse"

    I know I just wrote (none / 0) (#170)
    by Amiss on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 10:13:14 AM EST
    What equivocates as a "book" to me, at least but I would like to explain some things going on around here in Jacksonville. The young people buy these "huge" and I mean so big they take up the trunk space and in some instances, add trunk space plus the back seat and ride around with them blaring so loud it makes your teeth rattle if you happen to pull up beside them at a light or they decide to ride through your otherwise quiet neighborhood at all hours. Add to that many many military retirees and it comes down to whose rights are more important. Is it the teen wanting to listen to "loud" music? Is it the over 60 retiree living here to have access to medical care and base shopping?
    The "loud music" law that was in place if you came within 25' has been declared unconstitutional by the 2nd district AFTER the man shot the boy here was arrested. BTW I find it ironic that the boy's funeral was held in Kennesaw, Ga. Where in the past, at least, households were REQUIRED to own a gun.
    How loud is "too loud"? In Jax we now have a radio station telling its listeners to turn the music as loud as it will go, supposedly to "honor" Martin. I have no idea that this is honoring a dead child, but more to instigate more trouble.
    Just random thoughts on whose constitutional rights are the "right" rights.

    not Martin, the teen (none / 0) (#171)
    by Amiss on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 10:14:58 AM EST

    Of course you're justifying it (5.00 / 2) (#165)
    by shoephone on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:21:24 PM EST
    The remainder of your silly comment proves you are justifying it. And, FTR, I read the Tampa Bay Times article before posting my comment, and it includes this important piece of information, which I alluded to in my comment:

    He told officers he feared for his life. He mentioned that he thought White had an object in his hand, then backed off that when officers pressed him. Florida's "stand your ground law" says people are not required to retreat before using deadly force.

    "We determined it did not reach a level where deadly force was required," Puetz said.

    He lied and said the guy had something in his hand. The cops didn't believe him. Then he admit he made it up to justify his b.s. Stand Your Ground defense. And SYG was the first thing out of his mouth when the cops showed up. Give me a f*cking break.

    kdog is right. Maybe the appropriate response would have been to punch the guy. But pulling a gun was the absolute stupidest response to that situation. Of course, if he'd been using any brains, he could have simply backed away when the guy shoved him. That's what I would have done.



    Incidentally, the article does NOT state (5.00 / 2) (#166)
    by shoephone on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:24:41 PM EST
    that the whiny guy started the shoving match. It's not clear from the article who started shoving.



    I think the new tag line for gun control (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:30:16 PM EST
    should be "Guns Don't Make Anyone Smarter, Just More Dangerous...and Even Stupid."

    Or, how about "Pick up a Gun...Drop your IQ."


    Excellent: (5.00 / 6) (#8)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 06:00:57 AM EST
    Gun control is still the talk of the nation.

    Maybe (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by lentinel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 06:30:45 AM EST
    it"s the talk of the nation - whatever that means, but I seriously doubt that any meaningful action will be taken by this administration or this congress.

    It will all divert to fiscal cliff talk.

    This will all be forgotten in DC - as have all the other previous tragedies.

    A few tears.
    A quote from the Bible.
    A semblance of compassion.



    I prefer optimism, for which (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 07:00:44 AM EST
    LAT article provides support. Who will campaign on a 2nd Amendment right to  speedily slaughter 6 and 7 yr. olds at school?

    Your optimism beats lentinel's Eeyore today (none / 0) (#12)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:00:51 AM EST
    Obama speaking at 11:45 a.m. ET in the White House briefing room today to give an update on his plan moving forward on possible gun control legislation.

    I wouldn't expect specifics yet but it's a definite start. After some research this morning it does look like executive order could be used to tighten some loopholes improving background checks, but most other changes will have to go through Congress.


    It (none / 0) (#80)
    by lentinel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:15:04 PM EST
    should be an interesting discussion when the specifics do appear...

    Oh... (5.00 / 4) (#89)
    by lentinel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:36:08 PM EST
    Here's a specific - Biden is appointed to head a task force.

    One of the tasks will be to, "address ways to create a culture that doesn't promote violence."

    I guess they'll address those ways in between drone attacks on people chosen for the ever-expanding kill list.


    Vice President Biden's Task Force (5.00 / 6) (#105)
    by KeysDan on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:26:15 PM EST
    has its work cut out for it.  It is an immense undertaking to reconcile regulations and controls with Constitutional rights and settled law.  To assist in their work, they can look to other similar Constitutional and legal complexities and utilize some of those "good Republican ideas."  For example:

    Voting.  Gun ownership should be made as simple as voting; a new registration required every four years, government ID, birth certificate, utility bills, and a requirement that the applicant wait in line for 8 to 10 hours.

    Abortion. a 72 hours waiting period, required counseling about guns, mandatory views of gun atrocities, and trans-vaginal and/or trans-rectal ultrasounds to check for hidden contraband.

    Second Amendment. Required to join a militia--weekend drills and deployment for two weeks in summer, your choice of eastern Libya, Helmand Province, Sadr City, or suburban Damascus.

    And, the Task Force should take into account the  rights of gun shop clerks who do not want to sell guns for religious reasons.


    love this (none / 0) (#127)
    by womanwarrior on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:01:18 PM EST

    Hey, don't knock it (none / 0) (#140)
    by NYShooter on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 11:38:19 PM EST
    "address ways to create a culture that doesn't promote violence."

    Maybe you forgot...

    Nancy Reagan was given the same role, in a by-gone administration:
                             "Just Say No!"

    Ole Joe's gonna have to reach back for his A-game to beat that one.


    They dont need a commission (none / 0) (#141)
    by Amiss on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:54:21 AM EST
    for this. Just a dialogue with nations like Australia who passed legislation and massacres of this type dropped 44%.
    But that is too easy for Obama.

    Excluding America, (none / 0) (#168)
    by NYShooter on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 07:56:32 PM EST
    for 2011, the entire combined
    total of homicides by firearms.........1434

    America alone..........................9960


    I (none / 0) (#36)
    by lentinel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:09:15 PM EST
    prefer optimism too.

    I've been let down by these guys so often that I have abandoned optimism for the moment.


    You have abandoned optimism ... (3.80 / 5) (#42)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:39:16 PM EST
    ... as a matter of habit.

    Maybe (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:52:28 PM EST
    OTOH I think you have adopted denial as a matter of habit.

    See how that works?


    That could be true. (2.80 / 5) (#84)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:18:40 PM EST
    That said and acknowledged, I still trust my own judgment in these matters, and prefer to not disappoint myself time and again with the setting of unrealistic and / or unreasonable political expectations.

    I worked in this business long enough to know how the kabuki is going to play out, absent significant and meaningful public pressure. Real and tangible political change seldom if ever happens overnight. However well meaning they may be, politicians must still be compelled to do the right thing, and the only way you can accomplish that is through patient resolve and your own involvement in the political process.

    (And no, commenting here at TL is not considered "involvement in the process." Voting can be considered such, but only to a minimal extent. I'm talking about taking concrete steps -- either by yourself if you can, or perhaps more realistically, in concert with others like-minded -- to ensure that your voice and opinions are taken seriously by those public officials who were elected and / or appointed to ostensibly represent you in our public affairs.)

    If you want something bad enough, you have to ultimately prove yourself willing to get your own hands dirty in order to obtain it. Otherwise, you obviously didn't want it bad enough.



    Funny. (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by lentinel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:31:31 PM EST
    You say that you, "prefer to not disappoint myself time and again with the setting of unrealistic and / or unreasonable political expectations."

    How this differs from pessimism escapes me.
    It certainly is not "optimism". More like resignation.
    Much like I am experiencing.

    You look for almost nothing, and so you are not disappointed.

    I expect nothing, and am not disappointed either.

    What you call unrealistic expectations are what I would call the minimum our government should be doing for us.


    Unlike you, lentinel, I get my hands dirty. (2.00 / 4) (#133)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:40:47 PM EST
    I try to walk the walk to the best of my ability. I don't just talk the talk ad nauseum as you do, all sound and fury signifying nothing.

    Well, speaking of "ad nauseam," Donald, (5.00 / 4) (#136)
    by Anne on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:18:58 PM EST
    I think that pretty much describes the frequency with which you remind us all about your illustrious and oh-so-important contributions to the political process, always with the attitude that you are the standard-bearer for the right way to do everything in that arena.

    The truth is that you have no idea how or what lentinel does when he isn't commenting here, and neither he nor anyone else is required to prove his bona fides to you in order to have a legitimate and credible opinion.

    You really do need to get over yourself; if we can do it, I'm sure you can, too.


    Donald (2.25 / 4) (#138)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:25:23 PM EST
    Has really valuable insights into how this stuff works.  If others have more direct experience let them speak. Otherwise, stop hating on someone who has done the work.

    An (5.00 / 4) (#143)
    by lentinel on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 04:46:09 AM EST
    endorsement from the shill for the Don.

    What...commenting here is not (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:33:53 PM EST
    political involvement?  You are so mean Donald. You hurt my heart.

    Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!  sniff  sniff Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!


    You trust your judgement (5.00 / 8) (#96)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:51:11 PM EST
    and I trust mine.  Lentinel trusts his.  What makes you think your judgement is so much superior to mine or lentinel's or anyone else's?

    And when it comes to political matters I don't "disappoint myself time and again" because I'm not the freaking policy maker.

    And I've gotten more than one plank inserted into the Democratic party platform and easily given as much time and support (and maybe money, who knows) to the Democratic Party as you have.  Only to have my efforts and that of other Democratic activists sabotaged by our own party. So don't you dare get all smug and superior on me.  You don't have the right.  And you still wouldn't have the right even if I hadn't done my time for my former party.

    So you can take your patronizing lectures and put them where that beautiful Hawaiian sun will never, ever shine upon them again.

    Oh.  I almost forgot.  Aloha.


    Superior judgment? (none / 0) (#137)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:23:31 PM EST
    Funny.  People do that regularly here when they don't agree. But when they do it it is called "knowing the truth".

    It's all just opinions. And yeah, as much as some are declared apologists for the administration, others seem preoccupied with reminding us how terrible they are. Constantly. About everything. In every situation. Always. Repeatedly.


    Maybe we have beccome cynical (5.00 / 2) (#142)
    by Amiss on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:09:22 AM EST
    because time after time after time this administratiion has done NOTHING to equate a better country for us and the lies just keep getting grander and grander,instead of angry black guy,perhaps your moniker here needs to change to something more befitting your posts like "apologetic blind guy"

    I just had to get that off my chest, didn't mean it as an attack, just your sig does not reflect anyone angry, at least to me it doesn't.


    Why then, (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by lentinel on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 04:48:04 AM EST
    are you here?

    Yes, there are a lot of opinions expressed (5.00 / 3) (#146)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 06:49:43 AM EST
    here, and we're all entitled to do that, but you don't see others constantly elevating their opinions with endless recitations of their resume, do you?  And I don't think that's because no one else has done any of the work; from time to time, people do get specific about what they have contributed over the years - ironically, it's usually in response to Donald telling yet another person why their opinions don't matter and his do.

    Donald keeps telling us that politicians respond to constituents, so it's important that we all make our representatives aware of what we want, need and expect from them - as if we aren't already doing that!  In large part, much of the frustration expressed here is due to the fact that we aren't being listened to by the people who allegedly represent us - that that seems to have gone over Donald's head makes me question, quite honestly, whether he spends too much time admiring himself and preening for the rest of us, and not enough taking stock of what's really going on.

    Donald is, in spite of his efforts to make us think otherwise, just another person on a blog, no more and no less important than anyone else.


    Oy (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by sj on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 09:18:18 AM EST
    Or maybe that should be "whooosh!"

    Constantly? (5.00 / 3) (#153)
    by MO Blue on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 09:59:08 AM EST
    Kinda of like you rationalizing everything that Obama does? Or how about you constantly wanting to know which part of our Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid are we willing to sacrifice or how many more people can we push into poverty so that Obama can say he passed his Grand Bargain.  

    Oh, please. Get over yourself, Donald. (5.00 / 7) (#101)
    by Angel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:09:46 PM EST
    Plenty of us here have 'dirtied our hands', we just don't talk about all we've done.  If we weren't involved in politics and didn't care about the issues we wouldn't be on this blog trading comments and learning from each other.  Educating oneself by having these discussions goes a very long way towards making policy change happen.  It's the people who think they already know everything we need to be concerned about.    

    Charlie Brown was the eternal optimist, (5.00 / 7) (#100)
    by Anne on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:07:18 PM EST
    always certain that Lucy was going to let him kick that football, even though she yanked it away every single time.

    Nothing wrong with optimism, but optimism that refuses to consider reality and experience is closer to delusional, at least in my book.

    Granted, there seems to be more oomph behind this latest possible consideration of doing something about gun control, but given that the national wallowing has heretofore only ever reached the level of sound and fury, and resulted in nothing but more laws that make access and concealment easier, it's hard to see how skepticism that "this time it will be different" deserves such contempt.


    Your comment, (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by lentinel on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 04:57:50 AM EST
    "...optimism that refuses to consider reality and experience is closer to delusional, at least in my book."

    reminded me of this quote by Albert Einstein:

    "Insanity is doing the same things again and again expecting different results."

    It seemed impossible to budge Sen. (none / 0) (#110)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:49:17 PM EST
    from her right-of-center stances.  But she is taking the lead on again banning assault weapons.  This is good.  

    DiFi actually has a history ... (none / 0) (#132)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:38:33 PM EST
    ... of supporting gun control legislation, having been the author of the original assault weapons ban back in the 1990s.

    Given her personal experience when she became Mayor of San Francisco in the immediate aftermath of the assassinations of George Moscone and Harvey Milk at City Hall in November 1978 (she was the one who first discovered Milk's body), I think it's probably the one issue where you'll find Sen. Feinstein somewhat to the left of most of her colleagues, and it's one upon which she can speak with some authority.


    Of course. I'm pleased she (none / 0) (#161)
    by oculus on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 12:11:35 PM EST
    is speaking up.

    Oh (none / 0) (#73)
    by lentinel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:01:56 PM EST
    dry up.

    May as well call it... (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:59:58 AM EST
    new gun purchase semi-control...because the black resale market is gonna be boomin' kids.  And that's after every AR15 on the shelf in America sells this week.

    There is no solution...the stupid guns are one of the symptoms, not the disease.


    Good point (none / 0) (#16)
    by Reconstructionist on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:31:55 AM EST
      There is no "solution" in terms of any action or combination of actions that will eliminate murders. If you could wave a magic wand and make guns disappear people would still be killed by other means. If we combined that with the best possible mental health care system in terms of  access,  diagnosis, treatment and effective supervision of those most in need, we would still have murders.

      If your a biblical type, murder predates even prostitution. The only thing I really quibble with is calling what i believe to be man's inherent tendency to violence a "disease." I think it is more accuratelt considered a "condition."

      Yes, I am saying I believe humans are violent by nature. The tendency to violence is not mental illness; it is in all of us and must be "socialized" down to manageable proportions which is obviously  difficult to accomplish and it is impossible to socialize it out of existence.

      That said, policy can and should be informed by the the goals of both lessening the frquency of resorts to violence and reducing the efficiency  with which the acting upon a violent impulse produces death.


    Murder definitely not... (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:54:23 AM EST
    not even mass murder...not to say we can't try to reduce the number of mass murders, I just worry that we'll end up with an even more obscene prison population and about the same number of mass murders.  Whatever new policies and laws we enact will carry unintended consequences, I hope legislators at least give them proper consideration before passage.

    But as history has shown us time and time again, the mad rush to "do something!" after a tragedy often leads to bad law, bad policy.

    Nobody wants to hear it, but I think there is a certain level of human ugliness we must simply accept.  We can't legislate a change in our nature....but we can sure can legislate ourselves into more ugly.


    Well, it is inevitable (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Reconstructionist on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:10:23 AM EST
      that if you criminalize something new (or recriminalize something old) you will have more people convicted.

      If it becomes illegal to possess (or manufactutre, distribte,  etc.) "Item A" then it follows people who do that despite the new law will be convicted when they could not have been when Item A was legal.

      Of course that logic applies to all criminal legislation.

      I agree we must accept that a degree of innate  "human ugliness" will exist. We don't however have  to accept that external  conditions which translate that "ugliness" into violence and death cannot be ameliorated.


    Which is why I oppose... (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:19:02 AM EST
    most criminal legislation;)  I mean all those souls in prison and it's still a f*ckin' bloody mess?!?!  Why bother!

    I must say it is nice to have you back commenting my brother...your reason, eloquence, and openmind was sorely missed.


    I am glad and not suprised to see (none / 0) (#28)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 11:17:54 AM EST
    that you are not down with the prohibitionists.

    I tilt at enough windmills Pancho;) (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 11:33:09 AM EST
    If I could hop into the Delorean and uninvent the damn things I would.

    otoh, if reefer is federally prohibited an AR15 damn well should be! ;)

    No rhyme, no reason...No reason, no rhyme.


    why not restrict (none / 0) (#30)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 11:39:09 AM EST
    ammunition? Put a huge tax on it. Restrict the manufacture. Available at shooting ranges, but very restricted for home use. Why this woman had so much weaponry with so much fire power at her home, when her son was imbalanced is a mystery.

    behind the 2A would also suggest that the arms the citizens have the right to bear are not rendered useless.

    As far as Adam's mom, I also have some questions. It seems clear to me that either Adam or his mom purchased a bunch of stuff that, imo, goes beyond your "average" AR15 hobbyist.


    How much amo is useful? (none / 0) (#34)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:02:05 PM EST
    How much amo does a gun owner need at home for personal use? An assault rifle, or whatever, would not be useless without hundreds and hundreds of rounds for private use. Exception would be sport shooting ranges.

    What is the reasoning behind the 2A? (none / 0) (#37)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:10:14 PM EST
    I don't think it is about home use.

    Not sure what you mean (none / 0) (#40)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:23:22 PM EST
    Is it just for private militias/gangs?

    I mean that if the reasoning behind (none / 0) (#41)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:30:44 PM EST
    the 2A is about protection from "bad actors," be they aggressors from our own govt, foreign gvts, or what have you, a gun with little or no ammo would not seem to make much sense.

    How much ammunition do you need (none / 0) (#43)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:40:18 PM EST
    to fight police, or our military, or if Canada invades?

    At least as much as they have. (none / 0) (#44)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:41:41 PM EST
    Do you advocate for (5.00 / 4) (#46)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:57:29 PM EST
    personal use of drones, or nukes, or fully automatic weapons? Where can I get several of those cluster bombs for personal use?

    I tell ya... (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:20:55 PM EST
    if we wanna try to save children from violent death, a drone ban is probably a better place to start than an assault weapons ban.  There are millions of assault weapons out there that we can never put back in the box, but far far less drones.  

    Sh*t we don't even have to ban them, we just have to get Congress to stop buying them and the President to stop using them.  


    I'm not talking about a ban (none / 0) (#56)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:23:30 PM EST
    but an extremely high and thus restrictive tax on amo outside of sporting use at a shooting range.

    Ammo lovers.... (4.00 / 1) (#90)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:37:10 PM EST
    will do what this cigarette lover does...find a friendlier market and dodge the excessive tax.  Native American tribes might start selling ammo at the smoke shop.

    I hear what you're saying, in theory it sounds great...a 500 dollar tax per bullet, problem alleviated.  But in practice, all you do is create a black market.  If people want it and the taxes are too burdensome, someone will sell it tax free.  That's human nature.

    The only way to tackle this thing is to change hearts and minds...make people give up their guns and ammo willfully...ya can't extort them into behavior you prefer, you only harden their heart and make them mad....and make a gangster rich.


    You are right (none / 0) (#97)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:52:44 PM EST
    It would create a black market. But it might help and there would be money dedicated to the expenses of gun violence. And it would stigmatize hoarding of huge amounts of ammunition. And sport shooting would be left intact.

    The only people... (none / 0) (#147)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 08:14:12 AM EST
    who would be discouraged from buying large amounts of ammo are the people we don't have to worry about.

    The piece of sh*t plotting murder will find a way, by hook or by crook.

    Not to mention I'm not to keen on giving Uncle Same more money to buy more ammo, missiles, drones.


    Seriously man (5.00 / 5) (#53)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:21:27 PM EST
    this was never a reasonable conversation. How much ammunition does the casual home user need to have at home (and not at a shooting range). Why not tax amo very heavily?

    Oy. (none / 0) (#62)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:41:51 PM EST
    Oy ? (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:50:44 PM EST
    A tax dedicated to expenses related to gun violence. Like a cigarette tax. Gang/militia gun related violence and mass murders are expensive.

    Ya, oy. (2.00 / 1) (#70)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:55:34 PM EST
    What do you want to "tax very heavily" next? Voting? Free speech? Assembly? Trial by jury? Due process?

    don't be silly (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:57:42 PM EST
    Is it impossible to address my question?

    I'm being silly? (none / 0) (#74)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:03:52 PM EST
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:57:29 AM PST

    Where can I get several of those cluster bombs for personal use?

    Buh bye.

    read the thread (none / 0) (#79)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:14:08 PM EST
    that was in response to you saying that home users of arms should have as much amo as the government (police? military?) or an invading country. That is unrealistic. Home gun enthusiasts are out gunned by the big players.

    good lord, read your own question. (none / 0) (#81)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:16:19 PM EST
    How much ammunition do you need (none / 0) (#43)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:40:18 AM PST
    to fight police, or our military, or if Canada invades?

    Buh buy. Really, this time.


    read what that was in response to (none / 0) (#82)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:17:20 PM EST
    You have a constitutional right (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Peter G on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:06:34 PM EST
    to own and read books, but they are not required to be tax-exempt when you buy them.  The tax just can't be discriminatory.

    who pays for the carnage (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:11:42 PM EST
    that reading a book causes? Gun violence is expensive. Hey cigarettes are taxed.

    Oh for crying out loud (none / 0) (#94)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:47:30 PM EST
    I do not think reducing the amount of home use ammunition is a silver bullet. But it might help. Why not tax ammo with the monies dedicated to the expenses that gun violence incurs? A hefty tax that would discourage hoarding huge amounts of ammo. These kindergartners were shot 3-11 times each. If a private citizen likes to shoot, fine. Go to a shooting range.

     Why do private citizens need so much fire power at home? You said it is because of "bad actors" in our government (police? military?) and for invading forces. But the guns are not used for that, and in this century it is unrealistic to think some assault weapon could be effective against much more powerful weaponry used by our government or another. So guns are mostly for fun and for psychological reasons like a (an often false) sense of security, and I understand that. But why did this woman (who probably had a few 'mental' issues of her own) have such fire power in her home? It was easy and cheap.


    I don't know that the amount of ammo (none / 0) (#98)
    by Reconstructionist on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:52:52 PM EST
     is as big a concern as the type of ammo. To an extent the quantity a person possesses can be a concern in terms of private sales spreading it around, but a person with a million rounds of ammo is not really an appreciably bigger danger than a person with a box of 300 in terms of the harm he can cause in a violent episode.



    Please use the "parent" button.

    My point, in response to SUA@#70 (none / 0) (#125)
    by Peter G on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:42:16 PM EST
    was that being constitutionally protected -- such as private gun ownership, according to the Supreme Court -- does not exempt an activity from reasonable taxation.

    Thanks, you are talking of taxes that are (none / 0) (#149)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 09:29:46 AM EST
    "non-discriminatory" and "reasonable," I assume, and not "very heavy."

    Anyway, I am no expert on this tax subject but google says ammo is taxed at 11% via an excise tax. 11% is, I believe, higher than any US sales tax.

    Whether the 11% excise tax (FAET) is non-discriminatory and reasonable is very much debatable.

    I personally am certainly not against non-discriminatory and reasonable taxes on firearms and ammunition.

    kdog, btw, you hit this nail on the head. Apparently the Alaskan Native Americans sell ammo with no FAET.


    I think you are misconstruing what he means (5.00 / 2) (#151)
    by Reconstructionist on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 09:41:42 AM EST
     by "discriminatory.

      In this context, using books as an example first, "discriminatory" would mean certain books could not be  taxed at a greater rate than other books based on some impermissible reason or that certain buyers could not be taxed at a higher rate than others based on some impermissible reason. It does not means books as a class could not be singled out for a higher tax rate than other goods for a permissible reason such as simply raising revenue or conserving trees.

       Also, there is nothing in the constitution that says taxes have to be "reasonable." that's a political issue not a constituional one.



    Thanks, that's good info. (none / 0) (#152)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 09:59:04 AM EST
    Blind squirrel... (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 10:06:01 AM EST
    scores another nut...cha-ching! ;)

    ... what the sarcastic one is getting the spouse for Christmas.


    I Think the First Step... (none / 0) (#35)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:05:42 PM EST
    ...is started to hold the people who's legal guns become illegal.  Start making gun ownership a real responsibility.

    You don't want to lock up you deadly machines, or worse, sell them to any idiot on Craigs List or at a gun show, levy a fine, if it happens more than once, start ramping up the penalties.  Pull their right to own a gun if they have proven to be someone who can't seem to keep track of them.

    We do it for felons, for domestic abuse people, why not do it for people who lose track of them more than once.  If someone robs you, it's understandable they get your one of two home defense weapons, if they get you whole damn collection because it's not under lock and key, you dodn't deserve to have them.

    That would keep the nuts from whining about taking away their guns and hopefully get some of these clowns with caches for small armies, so take measures to ensure they don't end up becoming illegal.

    And it's easy to do, guns are remarkable easy to trace.  Speaking of, we have to eliminate the second-hand sales of firearms by ordinary folks.  Set-up some sort of consignment system for all registered firearms dealers.  They have a process to verify who is making the purchase.

    Let's start illuminating the number of guns falling into he wrong hands by making the owners of the guns realize they there is a cost and a responsibility to owning them.

    Obviously, we will never eliminate gun violence or mass shootings, but in CT, if mom had actually kept these guns in a safe, the kid might have still went on a shooting spree, but the number of people may have been greatly reduced.  And as far as every day violence in the streets, every single 'illegal' gun was a legal gun at some point.  We just need to make the cost of people making that transition more than most will bear.


    Has there been some official report that (none / 0) (#39)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:12:45 PM EST
    mom did not keep the guns in a safe?

    I think common sense would suffice. (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:16:54 PM EST
    I mean, if Mom had kept her firearms in a gun safe which only she could open, it naturally follows that Junior probably wouldn't have had her weapons in his possession last Friday.

    Ergo, she didn't keep her guns in a safe -- or at least, not in a safe enough gun safe -- and thus out of her disturbed son's reach.

    And thus, Mom becomes yet another unfortunate statistic to underscore my oft-referenced factoid that the risk of homicide is three times higher in homes with firearms than in gun-free households, and introducing firearms into a heretofore gun-free household actually renders its occupants less safe.

    (See Kellermann, Arthur L. MD, MPH, et al., "Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home," New England Journal of Medicine 329(15), pp. 1084-1091 (1993).)

    I urge you and everyone here to please read the Kellerman study. Gun proponents love to call it "controversial" and further dismiss its author as just another gun-hating leftist, but the well-supported findings of Dr. Kellerman, et al., have never been credibly contested by anyone of note in academia or otherwise. Aloha.


    Thanks, what we really need now is more (none / 0) (#57)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:26:49 PM EST
    guessing at facts and/or presenting opinion as facts.

    Oh, no. Rather, it is I who should be ... (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:37:00 PM EST
    ... thanking you for so neatly underscoring my aforementioned observation about gun proponents.

    Have a good day.


    ftr, I was responding to your first couple sentences.

    Come On. (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:34:49 PM EST
    Not trying to jump on the band wagon, but there are two options, they weren't locked in a safe or he cracked the safe, and since mom has been quoted as telling people 'not to live him alone for a second, don't turn your back on him', it seems very unlikely he had time to crack the safe w/o mom knowing.

    What we do know is she taught him how to use them proficiently and that she knew is wasn't in his right state of mind.  The purchase date of the Bushmaster proves it, sometime in 2010.

    I suspect people that buy these kinds of weapons are paranoid to say the least and that is probably was a home defense weapon, left for quick assess and more than likely, loaded, but that is pure speculation from people I know.

    But this doesn't really have anything to do with what I wrote for the fact the woman can't be punished.  One would think with all that we know know, which isn't that much, that estate is going to penniless from civil lawsuits.


    My only point is not to present conjecture (none / 0) (#91)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:43:56 PM EST
    as fact. Not only does J often delete comments for doing just that, but especially in this case as there were so many "facts" reported incorrectly after the shooting that it was ridiculous.

    if it had been officially reported, I wanted to be aware of it.

    In addition (none / 0) (#92)
    by Reconstructionist on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:44:01 PM EST
     to the dangers of making assumptions based on media reports, which have been demonstrably inaccurate many times already in this episode, we should be cautious about making hugely broad generalizations.

       Every person who buys a Bushmaster or other "assault rifle" is not "paranoid." Let's wait until we have enough information before we decide even what the specific problems of these particular people were.

      There is no need to rush to judgments. Any arguments for or against gun control can be made without the need to use evidence deficient hypotheses about what hapened here.


    Lastly, you "suspect people who (none / 0) (#95)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:48:39 PM EST
    buy these kinds of weapons are paranoid to say the least"?!

    It's so ridiculous I really don't know what to say to it...


    Ridiculous, Sure... (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:57:50 PM EST
    ...but no ridiculous then people making claiming these are home defense weapons.  Which was kind of my point, as to why some of these kinds of weapons aren't under lock and key.

    Look, I have a shotgun with a pistol grip that is loaded and close to wear I sleep.  I don't have kids, so I can do that, and I don't think we should fault anyone who has unlocked gun for home defense, locking it up would defeat the entire purpose.

    Nor do I think banning this or that kind of gun is going to have any real impact.  So my flippant remarks aren't coming from a point of view of wanting to take away guns.

    Not paranoid, I live in Texas, and I believe I am the only male in my department who doesn't carry concealed weapon to work, even though it's strictly prohibited.  My boss had to fire his maid because she brought her young son over to clean his house.  Apparently there is no seat in his house that he can't reach a loaded weapon from, including the bathroom.  There is a company sponsored gun club that occasionally goes to the range at lunch to shoot guns.  They don't hid, and it also violates gun on property policy.  That is just work in my small area, I could write a book on the paranoia I see here, so if that's not to your liking, well just agree that our definitions of paranoia are different and leave it at that.  Obviously know not every assault gun owner is paranoid, small have inoperable or small things in their pants too.  That is a joke by the way considering the shot gun I own probably falls in that class.  I grew up with guns.

    The entire reason I wrote about holding people responsible is because it's foolish to suggest any legislation that would actually get passed in this climate related to banning guns, isn't going to do a damn thing for gun violence.  If anything it will make it worse because the paranoid have already emptying the shelves of assault rifles, just in case, like they did in 2008 and 2012, right around November.  Pretty sure in 2008 they even ran out of bullets.  So if anything the thought of Obama has added many more guns to the market by the truly paranoid, as will any legislation.  And I apologize for using the P word, but one would hardly call people who buy guns because a Democrat is president, people of sound mind.


    Fair enough. (none / 0) (#114)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 04:08:28 PM EST
    Not necessarily... (none / 0) (#156)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 10:12:26 AM EST
    when I was still living at home and got sick and tired of my little brother constantly helping himself to my stash without asking, I bought a lock-box.  Little f8cker figured out to pick the lock and keep helping himself.  He's lucky I love him.

    Maybe the mother was remiss, maybe she took every pre-caution.  As one of the far too many mourners don't we at least owe her the benefit of the doubt for the time being?


    Err...I'm an idiot... (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 12:42:43 PM EST
    the poor mother isn't mourning, she was murdered too.  Make that maybe we shouldn't speak ill of the dead?

    Robert Bork has died (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:37:42 AM EST
    RIP. nuff said.

    I hear ya. Words fail me, too -- ... (none / 0) (#65)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:44:26 PM EST
    ... -- but only because this is a family-friendly forum.

    For those of you who'd like to beat a dead horse, pun intended, here's the guy's obit.



    I take that back. (none / 0) (#85)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:25:15 PM EST
    That was terribly rude of me. One should not speak ill of the deceased on the occasion of their departure from this life. After all, Robert Bork was somebody's son, husband, father, brother, cousin and good friend. We can debate his legacy, but may he rest in peace.

    Listened to Obama presser at noon et (5.00 / 6) (#106)
    by kmblue on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:28:53 PM EST
    First question:  was he not betraying his supporters by putting SS cuts on the table?  Answer:  five minutes of rambling (think: first debate), no direct answer to the question, and "nobody gets everything they want."  Total, spineless wuss.  I am outraged, beyond angry.

    Obama is not at all spineless (5.00 / 6) (#111)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:51:16 PM EST
    It takes a great deal of spine to keep putting Social Security back on the table when everyone else keeps taking it off.  Or maybe that's more gall....

    I couldn't help but think of ABG (5.00 / 2) (#115)
    by kmblue on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 04:10:53 PM EST
    and his 'tude about Obama.  Why I was expecting Obama to grow a spine, I don't know.  How can he cut the benefits of Social Security grannies when he doesn't have to?  His answer today seemed to imply everyone should have some skin in the game.  But he's flaying the skin off retirees while the 1 percent nurse a little blister.

    Why doesn't he just call it what it is--it's criminal to try to reduce the deficit on the backs of people barely getting by?  Does he think the Republicans would come back with, "We gotta starve granny too, dammit!"


    IMO, The Militia (5.00 / 4) (#109)
    by vicndabx on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:44:40 PM EST
    is not well-regulated.

    But it's certainly ... (none / 0) (#130)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:25:42 PM EST
    Lance Armstrong receives another award. (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by Angel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:52:29 PM EST
    This time it's the Texas Monthly annual Bum Steer Award.  Their article talks about all the titles he's been stripped of, all the endorsements he's lost, and ends with this comment:  "But there's one thing those ba$tards can never take from him:  He's our 2013 Bum Steer of the Year!"  

    I supported Lance until almost the bitter end when it became obvious that he had doped and lied about it.  Sorry, Lance, you are a liar and a cheater, but this is one award you deserved to win.

    Political Skills (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 06:09:35 PM EST
    John Boehner has them.  Apparently the only "balanced approach" he'll consider is total capitulation to his own plan.

    The body of Sen. Daniel Inouye is ... (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 06:24:07 PM EST
    ... to lie in state in the U.S. Capitol Rotunda tomorrow from 10:00 a.m. EST, with public visitation scheduled from 11:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. EST, making him only the 32nd individual to receive that distinct honor in the history of the country. Funeral services are scheduled for 10:30 a.m. Friday morning at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C.

    Immediately afterward, the senator's body will be flown home to Honolulu accompanied by his wife and son and a military honor guard. He will lie in state in the State Capitol Rotunda on Saturday, with public visitation scheduled from 5:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight. Private burial services will be held at 10:00 a.m. Sunday at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific in Puowaina Crater (aka "Punchbowl National Cemetery"), which overlooks the city.

    Aloha, Sen. Inouye.

    A question from the mainland (none / 0) (#124)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:32:40 PM EST
    I've heard the Senator's name pronounced two different ways repeatedly. Even on Honolulu television some pronounce with two syllables and others with three. Which way did the Senator prefer?

    His last name is actually pronounced ... (none / 0) (#126)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:56:45 PM EST
    ... In-OH-yay, with the accent on the second syllable. I've heard mainland journalists repeatedly mispronounce it as "IN-ohway," turning the "y" into a "w" and accenting the first syllable, and they're incorrect.

    Thank you (none / 0) (#135)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:02:53 PM EST
    Here's an interesting bit of trivia. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:23:11 PM EST
    How many U.S. senators did Dan Inouye serve with during his five-plus decades on Capitol Hill? The answer: 412.

    To give some mindnumbing perspective on that length of service, when Inouye first joined the Senate in January 1963, its most senior member was Democrat Carl Hayden of Arizona, who was first appointed as U.S. senator by the Arizona State Legislature back in 1912 when that state first entered the Union. (The 17th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides for the direct election of U.S. senators by the citizenry, did not come into effect until the 1914 elections.)

    Inouye and Hayden served together until the latter's retirement in 1972, and their overlapping careers cover a full century between them, and a lot of American history.



    Cassadee Pope was my pick from (none / 0) (#1)
    by Amiss on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 11:29:01 PM EST
    early on. I have always vascillated between her and Terry. I hope they will go far. I especially enjoyed Peter Frampton and Terry tonight.

    From info I gathered today, the tribute on the show and the mp3 were the most downloaded today. Luckily, my recording started in time to capture it all.

    I will miss Cristina and CeeLo next season.

    Cassadee became my favorite as the show (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Angel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:59:30 AM EST
    progressed, and I was thrilled she won.  Her rendition of Cry was hauntingly beautiful. Liked Terry from the beginning, he seems like a cool dude, and he sings the kind of rock music I like.  I think Amanda should have been in the finals instead of Nicholas although he was quite entertaining in the finals.  And, I love me some Blake Sheldon, glad it was someone from his team who won.  :)

    Does anyone really know what (none / 0) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 11:42:39 PM EST
    Asperger's really is, or are we just lumping together individuals who display certain identifiable "symptoms"?

    When Josh was born they had Freeman Sheldon Spectrum.  What my son suffers from can be genetically traced though through DNA.  12 years later we now know that at least four different gene mutations were being classified as Freeman Sheldon Syndrome.  Other individuals were being diagnosed as FSS though based on hand contractures and foot contractures and they weren't even closely or loosely related.  What a physician claims is gospel is gospel until it isn't.

    yes you can research it (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:32:22 AM EST
    From a well known expert's report in a very recent federal criminal case that I'd rather not cite for privacy of the defendant:  Asperger's is an organic, neurologically-based, pervasive development disorder on the same spectrum as autism.

    Individuals with Asperger's tend to have normal to high intelligence. They may have obsessive tendencies and pervasive deficits in social interactivity. While every case is different, four general characteristics are (1)  emotional and developmental immaturity, (2) lack of social judgment, (3) lack of empathy, and (4) poor impulse control.

    Commonly described clinical features of the syndrome include:

    (a) paucity of empathy;
    (b) naive, inappropriate, one-sided social interaction, little ability to form
    friendships, and consequent social isolation;
    (c) pedantic and poorly intonated speech;
    (d) poor nonverbal communication;
    (e) intense absorption in circumscribed topics, .[which] are learned in rote
    fashion and reflect poor understanding, conveying the impression of eccentricity ...

    (Source: A. Klin et al., Validity and Neuropsychological Characterization ofAsperger Syndrome: Convergence with Nonverbal Learning Disabilities Syndrome, 36 J. Child Psycho!. & Psychiatry 1127, 1127-1128 (1995). See also Am. Psychiatric Ass'n, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 77 (4th ed. 1994) ("DSM-IV'') (describing Asperger's as characterized by "[q]ualitative impairment in social interaction ... impaired use of nonverbal behaviors to regulate social interaction, failure to develop age-appropriate peer relationships, lack of spontaneous interest in sharing experiences with others, and lack of social or emotional reciprocity'').)

    Experts agree there is very little connection between Austism or Asperger's and violence. While not unheard of, such instances are rare.

    Also see What is Aspergers and Autism Speaks and The Many Faces of Asperger's Syndrome

    In recent years, Asperger's has been diagnosed in several prominent computer hackers, from Gary McKinnon and teenager Ryan McCleary in the U.K. to Adrian Lamo in the U.S.


    Those symptoms describe (5.00 / 3) (#108)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:37:03 PM EST
    quite a few high functioning people that I know. People who are otherwise known as arrogant jerks. I never know what to make of these diagnoses, honestly.

    There is a guy where I work (whom I really like actually, despite his personality difficulties), who is widely considered to have aspergers's syndrome, and has said so himself. He is very smart and works very hard, but can be quite obnoxious. He interrupts a lot, loves to hear himself talk, and doesn't listen to others well. He sometimes gets in trouble for this behavior, and certainly annoys a lot of people.

    I find he has many other good qualities to offset these, though.

    I just don't know if he has a 'syndrome' or just never managed to learn good manners.


    Rumor has it the new DSM (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 05:58:48 AM EST
    won't include Aspergers.

    Well, the DSM also got rid of... (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:18:17 AM EST
    ...psychosomatic disorders, which means officially that the psychiatric industry considers there to be no real connection between the brain and bodily disorders.  Oh they may say the weak little human brain might make symptoms worse, but they reject the idea the brain can create symptoms. I repeat, the psychiatric industry rejects the notion that the human brain, whose subconscious regions control every single aspect of your physical being, could actually create physical symptoms for psychological purposes. This despite decades of factual evidence to the contrary (just think of phantom limb syndrome, as an example). This came about, of course, because the pharmaceutical industry was more concerned with profiting from their pills, whether they worked or not, and they simply bought off the entire psychiatric industry in effect and still do. (Research how PTSD, not called that then of course, was treated very successfully without drugs during and after WW1, you will be amazed.) I mean, seriously, think about that: the official manual of psychiatric disorders essentially considers the brain incapable of controlling the body, WHEN WE FACTUALLY KNOW IT CAN AND WILL AND DOES. So...the DSM, in reality, is too much of the time a commercial and political document, not a medical one.

    The pharmaceutical industry has done much good, but when it comes to hindering the understanding of the actual power of the human brain, and our ability to heal ourselves through knowledge, well, it's been a gross disaster for everyone. And people continue to suffer, from a variety of physical and mental conditions, because medicine and psychiatry consider you to be nothing more than a machine with broken parts. They tend to only treat symptoms, in other words, not the actual disorder far too much of the time. Because treating symptoms with pills is where the profit is. Knowledge just ain't enough of a widget to profit from.


    Thank goodness... (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:56:07 AM EST
    for a healthy dose of empathy and friendships, I could have a couple of those other symptoms.

    You also don't have (none / 0) (#21)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:04:58 AM EST
    d) poor nonverbal communication
    Just saying

    Too kind, too kind... (none / 0) (#25)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:20:44 AM EST
    but you've never read my text messages! ;)

    And A Blog... (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:12:08 PM EST
    ...is hardly a place to judge someone's non-verbal or non-written, communication skills.

    I thought the DSM lumped Aspergers with Austism ?

    Either way, this kid just made life even more of a hell for any parent whose kid suffers the same affliction.  They are going to be booting these kids from everything now.


    See, that is why I question (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:13:47 PM EST
    Whether there is a true way to detect what is currently classified as Aspergers.  My experience with a spectrum diagnosis with my son was that they really didn't understand what was going on with the people they placed in that diagnosis for years and years.  When they did come to understand what was going on all these kids had completely different anomalies taking place but because they shared some common characteristics they had all been thrown in together under the same diagnosis.

    I know that Jeralyn says there is "research" on Aspergers, but there was over a hundred years of research on Freeman Sheldom Syndrome before they realized that all these different people had completely different anomalies.  I remain skeptical that this young man's issues were properly identified.


    I remain skeptical... (5.00 / 5) (#55)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:22:58 PM EST
    of psychiatry and mental health science, period.  

    Wouldn't surprise me to find that in 100 years everything we think we know today is found to be total bullsh*t.


    While I think people (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:36:36 PM EST
    really, really need a safe place to talk about their issues, and therapy has indubitably benefited many, many people, I still think that when it comes to mental health issues we have a lot of assumptions masquerading as understanding.

    Ha! (none / 0) (#26)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:29:40 AM EST
    I just consider that fat-fingering.  Along with an unhealthy dose of WTF Auto correct.

    Hey, wait a minute! (none / 0) (#59)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:32:49 PM EST
    Think about it now -- how much do we really know about kdog? I mean, how do we know that kdog isn't some psychotic deaf-mute who communicates only by the internet, perversely using his handicap as a means to stalk and manipulate his intended victims?

    I'm sure that has to be considered a possibility, otherwise why would it sound like such a plausible subject for a Lifetime Movie Network screenplay?

    Then again, you'd also never know if I turned out to be that psychotic deaf-mute in question, and that I actually don't live in Hawaii, but rather only three doors down from you?

    BWAH-HAH-HAH-hah-hah ...


    All we really know about kdog is... (5.00 / 4) (#123)
    by shoephone on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 06:24:38 PM EST
    what oculus tells us. But what do we really know about oculus???

    Oculus is either.. (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:39:16 PM EST
    the sweetest deep thinking culture hound around or one of the CIA's most convincing deep cover agents on a top-secret assignment to gather intel on subversive internet dopefiends.

    Either way always a good time Oc! ;)


    Dancing cop of Rhode Island (none / 0) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 07:07:17 AM EST
    PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) -- Ah, Christmas in Rhode Island. Exquisitely decorated mansions in Newport. A red nose on the giant termite that sits atop a Providence exterminator's building. And a traffic cop, doing disco and salsa moves in the middle of rush-hour traffic.

    Officer Tony Lepore is as much a holiday tradition as anything else in the state that issued the first jail sentence for speeding 108 years ago. Since 1984, he has entertained drivers, pedestrians and gawkers with dance moves in downtown Providence -- all while directing traffic. http://tinyurl.com/bredass

    Newtown massacre and the issue of gun control (none / 0) (#23)
    by Luke Lea on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:15:25 AM EST
    I saw a post on another blog which stated that "in the past 30 years, 543 people have been killed in 70 mass shootings. That's an average of 18 deaths per year. For comparison, three times as many die from lightning strikes."  

    The blogger went on to say: "The New Republic article linked in the previous paragraph states "I can't say exactly why mass shootings have become such a menace over the past few years, and especially in 2012." Given the low numbers, it's likely that it is just a random fluctuation without statistical significance.

    "To put things in perspective again, half a million Americans die every year from tobacco use. Two hundred thousand die from medical errors. Those numbers are large enough that it's possible to track changes with statistical significance, and evaluate the effect of public policy. There must be a fair amount of low-hanging fruit. For example, it's feasible that a 100% tax on the price of cigarettes would save thousands of lives ever year. Why is this not attempted?"

    Here is the link:  http://diegobasch.com/mass-shootings-political-correctness-and-magical-thinking

    Obviously when ... (5.00 / 4) (#27)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 10:32:15 AM EST
    ... denial doesn't work the next step is to change the subject.

    Here's a response I just heard (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Towanda on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 11:40:25 AM EST
    in updating my teacher training for what to do.

    This is from cops and others involved in school security.  They quote that standard line about lightning -- and then state that, in a lightning storm, we don't go stand next to a tall metal pole, now, do we?

    Nope, we take steps to reduce likelihood of being hit by lightning.  Ask the idiots with this argument whether we ought to remove lightning rods from their kid's school's roof.  

    Or, if we continue to allow the proliferation of guns everywhere around our kids, perhaps the real parallel is to ask the idiots whether we ought to put tall metal rods all over playgrounds and other school properties and then send our kids outside in a lightning storm.


    It's not about cold stats... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 11:44:04 AM EST
    "x" people died because "y"...it is how they die, and why.  If it was all about stats we could prohibit reproduction and eliminate death forever in 100 years!

    BTW..Obama, Cuomo, & Bloomberg are in fact trying to save my life via taxes, and the rate is closer to 300%.   Two fifty a pack from my Native American friends tax-free, over 10 bucks for Uncle Sam & Uncle Empire State sanctioned coffin nails.  I wish they cared about my life a whole lot less, lemme tell ya! Their great love for me would put me in the poorhouse, thank goodness the Seneca and Poopsatuck nations wanna kill me.;)  


    Grow Up (5.00 / 4) (#51)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:20:07 PM EST
    You forgot to mention the other 12,000 gun related homicides a year, more than killed by drunk drivers.  Unless those are statistically insignificant too.

    Only a child would think voluntary tobacco use is a good analogy for a murder victim, a slow child at that.

    And lastly, where are all you freaks with this statistically insignificant mantra when discussing terrorism ?  I would add the odds of being a victim of terrorism for someone in the US is actually lower than being a victim of a mass killing.


    In many places (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by Reconstructionist on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:23:35 PM EST
     the tax on cigarettes is greater than 100% in many places.

      There's a $1.01 a pack federl excise tax and the states all impose their own excise taxes, and most states also have a sales tax (as do some cities and counties).

      If the price a $4.50 pack of smokes incorporates a buck of federal tax, a buck of state  state excise tax (some  are higher some are lower) and a 6% sales tax. Yhr tax would be just about exactly 100%.


    kdog, check this out: (none / 0) (#49)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:16:47 PM EST
    Nancy Lanza, the mother of the Sandy Hook shooter, was in the process of having her son committed to a psychiatric facility when he went on the mass shooting spree, a lifelong family acquaintance told Fox News.

    A senior law enforcement official also confirmed that 20-year-old Lanza's anger over his mother's plan is being investigated as a possible motive for the Newtown shooting.

    Never Occurred to Her... (5.00 / 5) (#54)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:21:59 PM EST
    ...to lock up the guns or get them out of the house ?

    Or better yet, not show the unstable person in your home how to use them proficiently.


    She may have been one of the people that (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:32:36 PM EST
    thought having a gun handy would keep her safe from her unstable son. Seems that more often than not it does not quite work out that way.

    Ya, I assume we will find out the details. (none / 0) (#64)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:43:45 PM EST
    Saw that in the paper today... (none / 0) (#63)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:42:48 PM EST
    as we keep saying, who knows with so much misinformation and rumor out there.

    If true, I could see something like that making somebody snap.  The sense of abandonment, the prospects of psychiatric hospital prison.


    Yup. (none / 0) (#67)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:50:17 PM EST
    Kind (none / 0) (#76)
    by lentinel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:10:13 PM EST
    of a catch-22.

    She might have sensed that he was a dangerous nut, and was going to act on it... And that is what set him off?

    And if she wasn't going to act on it...
    What then?


    Yup again. (none / 0) (#102)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:13:35 PM EST
    I would really appreciate (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by NYShooter on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:13:43 PM EST
    not using the pejorative term,"nut" when referring to people with mental and other disabilities.

    I thought we were beyond that.


    Any info out yet (none / 0) (#104)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:25:55 PM EST
    about what meds Adam was taking?

    Reports say no drugs. (none / 0) (#107)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 03:33:12 PM EST
    NEWTOWN -- Investigators seized cellphones, computers and computer games during a search of mass murderer Adam Lanza's home -- but found no evidence that he was being treated with any drugs prescribed for mental illness, a source told Hearst Connecticut Newspapers.

    Investigators are using search warrants to get medical records to determine if Lanza was being treated for a medical or psychiatric ailment, and what, if anything, was prescribed, the source NEWTOWN -- Investigators seized cellphones, computers and computer games during a search of mass murderer Adam Lanza's home -- but found no evidence that he was being treated with any drugs prescribed for mental illness, a source told Hearst Connecticut Newspapers.

    That's not confirmed (none / 0) (#134)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:54:26 PM EST
    The father of the young man who said Nancy was going to commit Adam said his son was just repeating a rumor and wondered why Fox had run with it.

    We don't yet know if Adam was showing signs of violence beforehand. If not, Nancy is no more guilty than anyone else who has guns in the house but doesn't secure them in such a way that no one else in the house can get to them. At least, not until we know more about her.


    Thanks. I posted (none / 0) (#154)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 10:01:02 AM EST
    a conflicting report yesterday, I probably should have attached it to my original comment you are responding to.

    She should've planned (none / 0) (#157)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 11:15:35 AM EST
    to check herself in with him.

    I realize that we all have our blind spots, but this has to be the most pschologically tone-deaf mother since Ma Barker.

    Given this country's recent legacy of mayhem, in what universe is it considered a prudent therapeutic strategy to train your deeply disturbed son in the use of semi-automatic weapons, and then to stock your house with hundreds of rounds of ammunition and body armour??

    What reputable psychiatrist or psychologist of the last hundred years ever recommended a regime like that?

    "Nice person", schmice person, her troubles are over..

    And, as that late, great, redneck Ronnie Van Zandt said, "Put 'em all in the bottom of the sea."

    Go learn to play laser tag or something, y'all.    


    that she did any of those things.

    And I think you are mixing up the football/baseball, etc., garment-maker "Under Armour" with "body armor," neither of which, it appears, he was wearing.


    We don't know yet (none / 0) (#159)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 11:33:22 AM EST
    whether she's the one who purchased the guns and ammo? I thought that had been confirmed.

    Yeah, real men know the difference between "armour" and "armor"..


    You said this: (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 12:11:24 PM EST
    train your deeply disturbed son in the use of semi-automatic weapons, and then to stock your house with hundreds of rounds of ammunition and body armour??
    We don't know for sure that she did any of that.

    Not saying she didn't do these things, I'm just saying we don't have any official reports yet.

    I have the same questions regarding her, and some more that no one has raised yet that I'll discuss when the official reports come out.


    Cops Perform Roadside Cavity Searches... (none / 0) (#78)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 02:13:14 PM EST
    ...to liter bugs.

    The cop claimed he smelled marijuana, called in a female office, who gave a woman and her niece roadside cavity searches, using the same gloves.

    All caught on dashboard cam.  Both should be fired for using such poor judgement IMO, cops this stupid have no business 'protecting' the public.

    No marijuana was found and they were let go with a fine for littering.

    I am so tired of subsiding cops who are clearly defective with the inevitable, and rightfully so, large lawsuit.

    I didn't watch the video and I find it odd that it's posted.  LINK

    Not sure why it shouldn't be (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by brodie on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 04:20:19 PM EST
    posted.  The video isn't revealing in ways people might suspect but it is revealing of the outrageous overreacting misconduct of a couple of state highway cops in TX.  That's information about some of our law enforcement people I appreciate knowing about, just in case I decided to do any driving in that part of the Lone Star state.

    It's also revealing of how citizens will react differently in extraordinary situations involving improper law enforcement activity.  Frankly I was taken aback by how little resistance, verbal or otherwise, the two motorists put up to being body cavity searched.  Had it been me on the receiving end, I'm fairly sure the cop would have heard me giving him quite a verbal tongue lashing, possibly more, possibly physical resistance which would have led to being arrested for "assaulting a peace officer."

    Anyway, these two women ended up doing the right thing by suing, and I hope successfully. Hard to believe this doesn't constitute an unreasonable search under the Con.


    Nighttime darkness, not a lot of passing traffic, (5.00 / 3) (#119)
    by Angel on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 05:20:34 PM EST
    two cops with guns, not hard to understand why the women didnt protest too vigorously.  I hope both of those cops lose their jobs and that the two women are awarded lots of money for their humiliation.  The actions of those cops is beyond disgusting.  Unfortunately, there many more just like them on our streets, especially in Texas.  

    Taser fear (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by sj on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 05:34:58 PM EST
    is a very reasonable fear.


    Female cop has been suspended with pay. (none / 0) (#164)
    by Angel on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:19:59 PM EST
    She needs to lose her job, lose the lawsuit, and never again wear a uniform.  Ditto the male cop.  

    In the days before the massacre, the mother of Adam Lanza was pushing her loner son to leave the Newtown home that provided his refuge from reality, a family friend told the Daily News Wednesday.

    A recent attempt to take Adam on a southern vacation ended with his refusal to accompany his mom, who was also suggesting that he needed to get a job or perhaps start college.


     "I'm not sure that's the reason he snapped, but it's my best guess," the friend said. "I knew that that was the source of any stress between the two."

    The friend also rejected a report that Nancy was planning to have her son committed to a psychiatric facility.

    Feinstein NDAA amendment dropped (none / 0) (#139)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 11:19:37 PM EST
    in committee,  announced my Senator, Carl Levin of Michigan, who I voted for, cause my vote counts.  Yes it does.