So far, the picture painted by officials is that Adam Lanza was mentally ill, yet he had access to at least three firearms in his home. Why?
It’s also been reported that Adam’s mother, Nancy Lanza, whom Adam lived with and was his first victim, was keenly aware of his mental problems. Also, she was a firearms owner and had taken her sons shooting on several occasions.
What we have not heard is how her firearms were stored in her home. I would like to know.
In a home with a mentally unstable individual, even if that individual has previous firearm training, it might be a good idea to keep access to firearms tightly controlled, don’t ya’ think?
Firearms Safety and Gun Control begins at home. If you have a cavalier attitude towards firearms safety, you’re putting yourself, everyone in your household and anyone in contact with those in your household at risk.
I don’t have any proof, but I believe parental negligence to be the root cause of the tragedy in Newtown, CT. I believe mom did not follow proper precautions when storing her firearms. Especially considering she had a mentally ill son living with her. I hope I am proven wrong.
I hope, for her sake, it was purely this kid and his demons. I hope we find out he broke into her gun safe, took the guns without permission and proceeded to carry out these horrible deeds.
If otherwise, all the victims including Nancy and Adam may have paid for her negligence with their lives.
Recently, this video was posted to a Facebook group I admin. Watch it, then read on why I hate it.
Shooting firearms can be great fun when treated with the appropriate level of respect. Remember, the main purpose of any firearm is to render another living being incapacitated. It does this through injury or death. You may use it to dissuade an attacker through fear (of being incapacitated) or to punch holes in targets, but its main purpose is to fire a projectile into another living being and do enough damage to stop it.
Here’s why this video is not funny.
First, she obviously knows very little about firearms. She has not been taught proper respect nor safety, nor does she have any specific training on this firearm. Notice that her finger is on the trigger the entire time. In and of itself, leaving a complete novice with a firearm is a potentially dangerous situation.
Husband leaves her in care of a firearm. When he returns to “teach her a lesson”, he has no idea if the gun is loaded or not. You may argue that he didn’t leave her any ammo, but we don’t know that. And besides, you should always treat a firearm as if it were loaded, even if its been solely in your custody the entire time. Careless handling of firearms is what leads to accidents. Most of the time, being careless with a firearm comes with a cavalier attitude, ignorance or both.
Startling ANYONE holding a firearm is dangerous, especially someone who has no training. If the firearm is loaded, the person could cause it to discharge, leading to injury or death. Suppose a child or neighbor had innocently walked up on her, startled her, the gun had been loaded and she pulled the trigger? This video could have ended up as evidence in a court trial, not on YouTube.
I’ve taught proper firearms handling, safety and shooting to hundreds of boys over the years. I’ve taught a great many adults as well. It’s one of the things I do. Inevitably, one or two in the group think they know everything already because they hunt or have had a BB gun since birth. “Dad” taught them everything they know and I’m not as smart as “Dad”. Then I tell them about my wife’s uncle being shot while hunting and dying a few days later from his injuries. His best friend of 50+ years accidentally shot him during a turkey hunt. They had hunted together for decades without an incident. This time, his friend relaxed and didn’t follow the safety rules. He shot in a direction where he heard movement, but had no clear target. I always ask them “Can you imagine how guilty you would feel if you killed your best friend or your Dad simply because YOU didn’t follow the safety rules?” It usually get’s their attention. If it doesn’t, I don’t let them have access to a loaded firearm until they can demonstrate to me they are safe. If during the course of the training, they don’t or won’t follow the rules, they won’t pass.
I recently had an elderly woman as a student. She had never fired a firearm before. A local gun store sold her a revolver and she found couldn’t manage it on the range, so I went with her to look at some other models. We asked to look at a Glock 17. The clerk, a retired police officer, locked the slide back and presented it to her. She closed the slide and in a very joking manner, pointed the gun at him and said “Pow!”. Instinctively, I reached for the pistol from the bottom, grabbed the barrel and pointed it skyward. By the time she had uttered “Pow!”, it was pointing up and the clerk had ducked. We both knew it was unloaded, but our training took over. I gently rebuked her for not showing proper respect for a firearm nor for another human being, reminding her of the safety training she had taken earlier. She sheepishly apologized to him and then me. She is still my student today and she’s SAFE now. I’ll go shooting with her anytime.
Nope, this video is not funny. Too many ways to end up dead with shenanigans like this.
I have never been a Mitt Romney fan. He seems to be a pleasant person, but my research into his political and business dealings have left me with an uneasy feeling. Many of my friends and acquaintances think that his vast business experience is what we need to turn our country from the brink. Mr. Romney keeps telling us that we need jobs and he knows how to create them. However, and this is key, I can find nowhere in the U.S. Constitution where it says that one of the duties of the President is to create jobs. As a businessman, he has a record of creating jobs. However, the skills of a businessman are not the same skills required of the President and creating jobs isn’t listed in the Constitutional duties listed for the President.
There is a reason why this duty is not in the U.S. Constitution: The U.S. Government is NOT a business and SHOULD NOT be run like one. It should be run by strict adherence to the contract established by The Many States, The Constitution of the United States of America.
For many years the people elected to run the U.S. Government have ignored the boundaries of The U.S. Constitution either out of sheer ignorance or for personal and political gain. With the passage of the Seventeenth Amendment, The States have largely abandoned their obligation to enforce their contract with each other.
The ignorant masses of all political persuasions, whine and complain about how they are treated by their government, elected leaders, politicians and bureaucrats. Yet they refuse to educate themselves on how The U.S. Government, as defined by The U.S. Constitution, is supposed to work. Like spoiled children, they demand solutions for their situation in life, but few will put forth the effort to actually learn their role in the process.
Until the people become educated in their role in controlling their governments and demand a return to strict Constitutional government, the four-year cycle of election, disgust, election, disgust will repeat until one of two things happens – The Government collapses from underlying economic instability resulting in a pseudo-anarchy or the Government moves into a dictatorship. Fortunately there has been some movement toward self-education.
Electing a President who is a strict Constitutionalist, a person of resolve and conviction who will wield the power of the Presidential Veto without regard to his own popularity and in favor of The U.S. Constitution, is the answer to our predicament. However, to do so will require the people to understand the proper role of government and be willing to forego government solutions to their problems. It will require the people to understand their own role within the process of government through self-education.