Newtown Shooter Had Asperger Syndrome, And Some US Gun Facts

Tyler Durden's picture

Update: The focus now shifts to the mother, the first casualty of her son's murderous rampage, who was a "big, big gun fan" as the NYT explains, and who went target shooting with her children, one of whom had Asperger's.

From the NYT:

She was “a big, big gun fan” who went target shooting with her children, according to friends. She enjoyed craft beers, jazz and landscaping. She was generous to strangers, but also high-strung, as if she were holding herself together.


Nancy Lanza was the first victim in a massacre carried out on Friday by her son Adam Lanza, 20, who shot her dead with a gun apparently drawn from her own collection, then drove her car to Sandy Hook Elementary School, where he killed 26 people, 20 of them small children, officials said.


At craft beer tastings on Tuesday evenings, he recalled, she liked to talk about her gun collection.


“She had several different guns,” he said. “I don’t know how many. She would go target shooting with her kids.”


Law enforcement officials said they believed that the guns were acquired lawfully and registered.


* * *


She was “a big, big gun fan,” he added on his Web site.

Read on here

* * *

As we reported last night, buried inside the NYT biopic of Newtown shooter Adam Lanza was arguably one of the most important missing pieces in the story, at least so far, which could provide clues into partially explaining yesterday's tragic loss of young life, namely that the 20 year old man suffered from Asperger Syndrome, a high-functioning form of autism (two conditions which are being merged in the upcoming update of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5) manual of mental disorders), which has been traditionally associated with social communication difficulties, including flat affect, and one which in some clinical studies has been shown to have a causal link to violence. In other words, in addition to the surge in the debate over national gun control and access limitations (ignoring that the perpetrator of the biggest school mass murder in US history - the Bath School disaster - used openly purchased dynamite and no guns, also ignoring that in the US there are roughly 300 million firearms), perhaps there should also be a broad discussion as to the risks of social misadoption of children with autism and other social and behavioral disorders.

From CBS/AP:

He was an honors student who lived in a prosperous neighborhood with his mother, a well-liked woman who enjoyed hosting dice games and decorating the house for the holidays.


Now Adam Lanza is suspected of killing his mother and then gunning down more than two dozen people, 20 of them children, at a Connecticut grade school before taking his own life.


The 20-year-old may have suffered from a personality disorder, law enforcement officials said.


The New York Times reported Saturday morning that several people told the newspaper that Lanza had Asperger’s syndrome, a high-functioning form of autism.


The Times reported Lanza did not have a Facebook page and did not pose for a high school yearbook picture.


He was described as socially awkward and was known in high school as “intelligent, but nervous and fidgety, spitting his words out, as if having to speak up were painful.”


Investigators were trying to learn as much as possible about Lanza and questioned his older brother, who is not believed to have any involvement in the rampage.


Lanza killed his mother at their home before driving her car to Sandy Hook Elementary School and — armed with at least two handguns — carried out the massacre, officials said.


A third weapon, a .223-caliber rifle, was found in the car, and more guns were found inside the school.


So far, authorities have not spoken publicly of any possible motive. Witnesses said the shooter didn’t utter a word.


Catherine Urso, who was attending a vigil Friday evening in Newtown, Conn., said her college-age son knew the killer and remembered him for his alternative style.


“He just said he was very thin, very remote and was one of the goths,” she said.


* * *


Adam Lanza’s older brother, 24-year-old Ryan Lanza of Hoboken, N.J., was being questioned, a law enforcement official said. He told authorities that his brother was believed to suffer from a personality disorder, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record about the unfolding investigation.


The official did not elaborate, and it was unclear exactly what type of disorder he might have had.


Ryan Lanza had been extremely cooperative and was not under arrest or in custody, but investigators were still searching his computers and phone records. Ryan Lanza told law enforcement he had not been in touch with his brother since about 2010.


* * *


Adam Lanza attended Newtown High School, and several local news clippings from recent years mention his name among the school’s honor roll students.

And while much needed insight into the shooter's abnormal mental state is critical before passing judgment, the reality is that Lanza - who may well have been mentally disturbed - should certainly not have had access to the arsenal of weapons he ultimately used in perpetrating yesterday's tragedy. The much debated question, of course, that is already emerging is whose responsibility is it to limit such access: that of the individual, that of the closest family members, or that of the state, and if it is the latter, then the question becomes one of practical enforceability in a country where the second amendment is deeply engrained in the popular psychology, and where there are nearly as many guns as people.


Some more facts and figures - without opinions - on US weapons from

Introductory Notes

This research is based upon the most recent available data in 2010. Facts from earlier years are cited based upon availability and relevance, not to slant results by singling out specific years that are different from others. Likewise, data associated with the effects of gun control laws in various geographical areas represent random, demographically diverse places in which such data is available.

Many aspects of the gun control issue are best measured and sometimes can only be measured through surveys,[1] but the accuracy of such surveys depends upon respondents providing truthful answers to questions that are sometimes controversial and potentially incriminating.[2] Thus, Just Facts uses such data critically, citing the best-designed surveys we find, detailing their inner workings in our footnotes, and using the most cautious plausible interpretations of the results.

Particularly, when statistics are involved, the determination of what constitutes a credible fact (and what does not) can contain elements of personal subjectivity. It is our mission to minimize subjective information and to provide highly factual content. Therefore, we are taking the additional step of providing readers with four examples to illustrate the type of material that was excluded because it did not meet Just Facts' Standards of Credibility.


General Facts

Firearms are generally classified into three broad types: (1) handguns, (2) rifles, and (3) shotguns.[3] Rifles and shotguns are both considered "long guns."

A semi-automatic firearm fires one bullet each time the trigger is pulled and automatically loads another bullet for the next pull of the trigger. A fully automatic firearm (sometimes called a "machine gun") fires multiple bullets with the single pull of the trigger.[4]


As of 2009, the United States has a population of 307 million people.[5]

Based on production data from firearm manufacturers,[6] there are roughly 300 million firearms owned by civilians in the United States as of 2010. Of these, about 100 million are handguns.[7]

Based upon surveys, the following are estimates of private firearm ownership in the U.S. as of 2010:

   Households With a Gun  Adults Owning a Gun  Adults Owning a Handgun
Percentage  40-45%  30-34%  17-19%
Number  47-53 million  70-80 million  40-45 million

A 2005 nationwide Gallup poll of 1,012 adults found the following levels of firearm ownership:


 Percentage Owning

a Firearm

Households  42%
Individuals  30%
Male  47%
Female  13%
White  33%
Nonwhite  18%
Republican  41%
Independent  27%
Democrat  23%

In the same poll, gun owners stated they own firearms for the following reasons:

Protection Against Crime  67%
Target Shooting  66%
Hunting  41%


Crime and Self-Defense

Roughly 16,272 murders were committed in the United States during 2008. Of these, about 10,886 or 67% were committed with firearms.[11]

A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]

Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders.[13] [14] [15] Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.[16]

Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18]

A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]

A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]

A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]

• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"

• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"

• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]

Click here to see why the following commonly cited statistic does not meet Just Facts' Standards of Credibility: "In homes with guns, the homicide of a household member is almost 3 times more likely to occur than in homes without guns."


Vulnerability to Violent Crime

At the current homicide rate, roughly one in every 240 Americans will be murdered.[23]

A U.S. Justice Department study based on crime data from 1974-1985 found:

• 42% of Americans will be the victim of a completed violent crime (assault, robbery, rape) in the course of their lives

• 83% of Americans will be the victim of an attempted or completed violent crime

• 52% of Americans will be the victim of an attempted or completed violent crime more than once[24]

A 1997 survey of more than 18,000 prison inmates found that among those serving time for a violent crime, "30% of State offenders and 35% of Federal offenders carried a firearm when committing the crime."[25]


Right-to-Carry Laws

Right-to-carry laws permit individuals who meet certain "minimally restrictive" criteria (such as completion of a background check and gun safety course) to carry concealed firearms in most public places.[95] Concealed carry holders must also meet the minimum federal requirements for gun ownership as detailed above.

Each state has its own laws regarding right-to-carry and generally falls into one of three main categories:

1) "shall-issue" states, where concealed carry permits are issued to all qualified applicants

2) "may-issue" states, where applicants must often present a reason for carrying a firearm to an issuing authority, who then decides based on his or her discretion whether the applicant will receive a permit

3) "no-issue" states, where concealed carry is generally forbidden

As of January 2012:

40 states are shall-issue:

 Alaska  Arizona  Arkansas  Colorado
 Florida  Georgia  Idaho  Indiana
 Iowa  Kansas  Kentucky  Louisiana
 Maine  Michigan  Minnesota  Mississippi
 Missouri  Montana  Nebraska  Nevada
 New Hampshire  New Mexico  North Carolina  North Dakota
 Ohio  Oklahoma  Oregon  Pennsylvania
 Rhode Island  South Carolina  South Dakota  Tennessee
 Texas  Utah  Vermont  Virginia
 Washington  West Virginia  Wisconsin  Wyoming

9 states are may-issue:

 Alabama  California  Connecticut  Delaware
 Hawaii  Maryland  Massachusetts  New Jersey
 New York      



In 2007, there were 613 fatal firearm accidents in the United States, constituting 0.5% of 123,706 fatal accidents that year.[120]

Fatal firearm accidents in 2007 by age groups:

Age Group Fatal Firearm Accidents
Raw number Portion of fatal accidents

from all causes

<1 yrs  1  0.1%
1-4 yrs  18  1.1%
5-9 yrs  20  2.1%
10-14 yrs  26  2.1%
15-24 yrs  155  1.0%
25-34 yrs  94  0.6%
35-44 yrs  91  0.5%
45-54 yrs  82  0.4%
55-64 yrs  57  0.5%
65+ yrs  69  0.2%



In 2007, there were roughly 15,698 emergency room visits for non-fatal firearm accidents,[123] constituting 0.05% of 27.7 million emergency room visits for non-fatal accidents that year.[124]

These emergency room visits for non-fatal firearm accidents resulted in 5,045 hospitalizations,[125] constituting 0.4% of 1.4 million non-fatal accident hospitalizations that year.[126]


Criminal Justice System

Nationwide in 2008, law enforcement agencies reported that 55% of aggravated assaults, 27% of robberies, 40% of rapes, and 64% of murders that were reported to police resulted in an alleged offender being arrested and turned over for prosecution.[26] [27]

Currently, for every 12 aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders committed in the United States, approximately one person is sentenced to prison for committing such a crime.[28] [29] [30]

A 2002 U.S. Justice Department study of 272,111 felons released from state prisons in 1994 found that within three years of their release:

• at least 67.5% had been arrested for committing a new offense

• at least 21.6% had been arrested for committing a new violent offense

• these former inmates had been charged with committing at least 2,871 new homicides, 2,444 new rapes, 3,151 other new sexual assaults, 2,362 new kidnappings, 21,245 new robberies, 54,604 new assaults, and 13,854 other new violent crimes[31]

Of 1,662 murders committed in New York City during 2003-2005, more than 90% were committed by people with criminal records.[32]

Washington, DC

In 1976, the Washington, D.C. City Council passed a law generally prohibiting residents from possessing handguns and requiring that all firearms in private homes be (1) kept unloaded and (2) rendered temporally inoperable via disassembly or installation of a trigger lock. The law became operative on Sept. 24, 1976.[33] [34]

On June 26, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, struck down this law as unconstitutional.[35]

During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law, while the U.S. murder rate averaged 11% lower.[37]


In 1920, Britain passed a law requiring civilians to obtain a certificate from their district police chief in order to purchase or possess any firearm except a shotgun. To obtain this certificate, the applicant had to pay a fee, and the chief of police had to be "satisfied" that the applicant had "good reason for requiring such a certificate" and did not pose a "danger to the public safety or to the peace." The certificate had to specify the types and quantities of firearms and ammunition that the applicant could purchase and keep.[38]

In 1968, Britain made the 1920 law stricter by requiring civilians to obtain a certificate from their district police chief in order to purchase or possess a shotgun. This law also required that firearm certificates specify the identification numbers ("if known") of all firearms and shotguns owned by the applicant.[39]

In 1997, Britain passed a law requiring civilians to surrender almost all privately owned handguns to the police. More than 162,000 handguns and 1.5 million pounds of ammunition were "compulsorily surrendered" by February 1998. Using "records of firearms held on firearms certificates," police accounted for all but fewer than eight of all legally owned handguns in England, Scotland, and Wales.[40]

† Homicide data is published according to the years in which the police initially reported the offenses as homicides, which are not always the same years in which the incidents took place.
‡ Large anomalies unrelated to guns:
2000: 58 Chinese people suffocated to death in a shipping container en route to the UK
2002: 172 homicides reported when Dr. Harold Shipman was exposed for killing his patients
2003: 20 cockle pickers drowned resulting in manslaughter charges
2005: 52 people were killed in the July 7th London subway/bus bombings

Not counting the above-listed anomalies, the homicide rate in England and Wales has averaged 52% higher since the outset of the 1968 gun control law and 15% higher since the outset of the 1997 handgun ban.[42]



In 1982, the city of Chicago instituted a ban on handguns. This ban barred civilians from possessing handguns except for those registered with the city government prior to enactment of the law. The law also specified that such handguns had to be re-registered every two years or owners would forfeit their right to possess them. In 1994, the law was amended to require annual re-registration.[43] [44] [45]

In the wake of Chicago's handgun ban, at least five suburbs surrounding Chicago instituted similar handgun bans. When the Supreme Court overturned the District of Columbia's handgun ban in June 2008, at least four of these suburbs repealed their bans.[46] [47] [48] [49] [50]

In June 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5-4) that Chicago's ban is unconstitutional.[51]

Since the outset of the Chicago handgun ban, the Chicago murder rate has averaged 17% lower than it was before the law took effect, while the U.S. murder rate has averaged 25% lower.[53]

Since the outset of the Chicago handgun ban, the percentage of Chicago murders committed with handguns has averaged about 40% higher than it was before the law took effect.[55]

In 2005, 96% of the firearm murder victims in Chicago were killed with handguns.[56]

* * *

Much more here

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
dryam's picture

Abraham Lincoln & Winston Churchill had bipolar disorder. What's your point? Tragedies like this can not be prevented. They can only be minimized by minimizing access to assault weapons.

Richard Chesler's picture

That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.

~ George Orwell, sergeant in Home Guard

dryam's picture

Ignorance about mental illness runs rampant in our society. It parallels that of financial ignorance. Mental illness is very common & disorders are far from being black & white; they are spectrum disorders with innumerable shades of grey.

Tragedies will happen, but they'll be much more prevalent in some cultures versus others.

theMAXILOPEZpsycho's picture

second ammendment fanatics have blood on their hands today - the blood of children

I'm doing everything in my powers in my job with the government to make gun ownership a crime so heinous, so dastardly, that no one would ever consider owning one. It is tantamount to terrorism, nay, it IS terrorism as owning one is an open admission you don't have the respect or trust in the authorities to do their job and protect their citizens from harm.


Ralph Spoilsport's picture

Hopefully you don't have a lot of power in your gubmint job because you're a stupid jerk. What's your function, changing toner cartridges? Thinking is above your pay grade.

Janice's picture

The batman shooter and the child killer were both gamers, guns have been around for hundreds of years. Any research on gamers being more aggressive?

MiguelitoRaton's picture

The latest mass shooting is a tragedy and my heart goes out to all people involved. Any rational person will agree that if we could somehow pass a law that would stop all gun crime, we should do it. Many people are calling for gun control laws in the wake of this. Let me share with you a story: Wednesday I was in a cancer ward at a hospital talking with a young couple. She was pregnant with her second child and going through chemo (during pregnancy...ugh). Her husband had a limp because he had been shot in the leg the prior month by a meth addict in a home invasion. Since that time she has converted to a gun advocate and he has purchased a shotgun. Gun laws would NOT disarm the law breaking meth addict, but they would disarm the law abiding couple and the meth addict would then be MORE active at home invasions, knowing full well that his law-abiding victims were unarmed. Gun laws would make that poor young couple, and many more like them, helpless victims. Statistics tell us that guns play a role in stopping 2.5 million crimes each year.


If you look at the mass shootings of the past, the ones that come to mind are Aurora, Austin (old bell tower), and Columbine. In each of these cases the shooter was on antidepressants known to cause violent, paranoid, homicidal and suicidal tendencies. This shooter had a “personality disorder” I am waiting to see what meds he was on. SSRI is one type of drug that has a high correlation to mass murder. In the 90’s SSRI was only for adults, now we are giving them to kids who are living in a world saturated with violence (movies, TV, video games). Other countries have restricted such prescriptions (Japan, UK, etc.)


Now many people on Facebook compare countries. If we just had gun laws like Japan we would have no gun violence, just like them. Well Mexico has some of the strongest gun laws in the world, but is also a leader in murder by gun. Switzerland has some of the broadest gun ownership, but they have none of these problems. Culturally, we are somewhat similar to Australia. They banned guns and the violent crimes went up dramatically. It also kicked off a wave of “home invasions” a new thing there, precipitated by unarmed homeowners.


I know it sounds trite, but gun laws truly disarm the law-abiding, not the law breakers. I heard a policeman say that he had taken “hundreds of guns off the street from bad guys and in all those years only one was registered.” Prisoners have been polled and 80% of the guns of the prisoners polled were obtained illegally. Gun laws would not change this.


Some are calling for restrictions on the type or number of guns. Even if you eliminate semi-automatic pistols, a revolver with a speedloader is extremely fast to reload, especially when the victims are all unarmed. In terms of the number of guns one should own, guns have all different purposes. You might have one pistol for each adult, in case one travels and takes his gun with him. You might have a short barrel shotgun for home defense, like the couple above. You might have a 22 for competitive target shooting. You might have a long barrel shotgun for skeet or trap. You might have a 30-06 for hunting, etc. Do we really want the government telling us how many of something we can have? How many TVs will they allow me to have in my home?


Sadly, it isn’t about the guns; guns are merely a tool. Sick murderous individuals will find a way. You can find out how to make pipe bombs on the Internet. A gallon of gas can be had for $4 and turned into several Molotov cocktails, a simple car can plow down dozens of people. See Bath School Disaster, Ralston,2933,269717,00.html, the list goes on. Germany has very strong gun control laws but they too have this scourge The largest death counts from such attacks were accomplished with a fertilizer bomb and box cutters.


Some might argue that the second amendment was intended ONLY for a well-regulated militia. This is clearly a faulty interpretation:


One might argue that laws would STILL reduce access to guns. Yes, they would. But if laws actually prevented behavior, then our drug laws would result in less drugs. They have not. Again the fallacy of the “let’s compare countries” is displayed again. Japan has strict drug laws and very little drug use. This is because the Japanese are culturally very law abiding. Here in the US we see that prohibition resulted in MORE bars in big cities, not fewer. Sadly, gun laws, like in Australia only disarm the law-abiding. There are roughly 270 million guns in the US. What any law will make all of them disappear and prevent further importation? Even if the bad guys kept their guns, and let’s say that was 10%, that is 27 million guns, or almost one for every 10 people. How do we protect the good people against these bad people? Everybody hates seeing mass murders, but what about that couple going through chemo? Should we really disarm them and allow the armed villains to run rampant?


Our society is a cocktail of too much dangerous medication, press glorification (anti-hero) of these shootings, too much violence in media/games, social isolation (Internet, TV, etc.) and guns. But guns are merely one of many tools available to the crazies. I am in favor of confiscating weapons from people using antidepressants. But even in this case the shooter stole the weapons from his mother, whom he also killed.


Gun laws that prohibit guns in certain areas like movie theaters (Aurora), schools (Columbine and this latest one), malls (Oregon) and military bases (Fort Hood) seem only to provide large numbers of unarmed targets for these sick individuals. Such restrictions on larger scale (Washington DC, Australia, etc.) merely provide entire societies of unarmed victims.


This is a very emotional time. People get angry with this sort of logic and tell me I should have to look in the eyes of the mother whose child was killed and tell her that we need legal access to guns to keep law abiding citizens safe. Well how can I look into the eyes of that couple who suffered a home invasion by a meth addict and tell them that they do not have a right to self-defense, that the father cannot protect his wife, child and unborn child against the next attack…which will be all the more frequent now that the bad guys know you are disarmed?  

Freddie's picture

Michael Savage has talked a lot on his show about anti-depressants and other drugs perscribed to young men with disastorous consequences.  

What happened yesetrday was horrible.   I read Tyler's article and it said the young man did not have a Facebook page?  WTF?  If you don't have a Facebook page is it a sign you are anti-social?

How did he gain access to the guns?   I heard the family owned them?

Ban video games before you ban guns.  It will never happen because the scum in hollywood are deeply involved in the gaming business. 

Since dear mullah was "elected" four years ago - probably 40 to 55 million more guns were sold.   I would bet 15 million more will be sold in 2013   A lot of them are AR 15s.  The public is buying them because they fear the govt and criminals.

Mass murders of children were used to disarm the UK and Australia.  These events give the elites the power to gain total control.  Too many of these cases mass murders or assasinations by "loners" look like Manchurian Candidate mind control.

Ralph Spoilsport's picture

Many Aspergers are prescribed Effexor based on a few acquaintances who suffer from it. Read the side effects:

Also this quote from above:

"Do not stop using Effexor suddenly, or you could have unpleasant symptoms."

Begs the question, did Lanza stop taking his meds and have "unpleasant symptoms"?

Uncle Remus's picture

And if he did stop taking his meds suddenly, did he do so consciously?

Ralph Spoilsport's picture

It's possible. The side effects are apparently unpleasant. All of these SSRI type meds require a long period of suffering side effects before they start to help the condition they were prescribed for. It ends up not curing anything, but establishing a new "condition" mentally. They aren't even sure of how these meds actually work.

AldousHuxley's picture

#1 killer for 25 and younger is SUICIDE


In China, they had a crazy guy  kill bunch of kids in school with a knife.


The problem is ths kid's father who abandoned family and started another one. Mother receivevd six figure alimony to be able afford all those guns while part timing as a substitute teacher.Something is not right when the single mother owns semi-automatics and practice shoots.


Think about the kid abandoned by his father and his mother just shopping her sorrows away with random guys in her 40s.


You ban guns, kid would use a knife.

You ban knives, kid would use a dirty bomb

You ban bombs, kid would use stones.


When these messed up kids grow up, they become banksters and try to take revenge against the world by joining the dark side.


Arthur Borges's picture

Um, on your China story, the perp injured 22 schoolchildren; some were in critical condition but no deaths yet. What prevented the attacker from claiming a larger number of victims was the lack of an effective weapon.

The US right to bear arms has been obsolete ever since it was no longer worth killing Indians anymore: businesses organized the Boston Tea Party to avoid a tax earmarked for more British troops to defend colonists form the Indians. Only businesses were really taxable and they opted to sabotage the tax and leave colonists to protect themselves, thereby turning a penny on the arms and ammo sales as well as enjoying the benefits of the free security enhancement.

That's all the right to bear arms was ever about at the outset.

DosZap's picture

That's all the right to bear arms was ever about at the outset.


Another idiotic untruth

Pls read the Const, and BOR"s............

jeff montanye's picture

i'm all for the right to bear arms but that story about business working both sides of the transaction (less taxes, sell guns and ammo) sounds so true.  we delude ourselves by thinking that, wonderful as the constitution was and is, the times that gave it birth have no relation to our own.'s picture

The Boston Tea Party was undertaken by citizens of that locality in 1773. The Bill of Rights was adopted by the US House of Representatives in 1789. These decisions were made by a completely different set of individuals living within a different political and tax structure sixteen years apart.

Rubbish's picture

Conn. May-Issue state... If more people were able to carry, some, not all of this would slow. In a couple decades we kill most the bad guys.'s picture




Pearl High School shooting


The incident began on the morning of October 1, 1997 when Luke Woodham fatally stabbed and bludgeoned his mother, Mary Woodham, as she prepared for a morning jog. At his trial, Woodham claimed that he could not remember killing his mother.

Woodham drove his mother's car to Pearl High School. Wearing an orange jumpsuit and a trenchcoat,[1] he made no attempt to hide his rifle. When he entered the school, he fatally shot Lydia Kaye Dew and Christina Menefee, his former girlfriend. Pearl High School assistant band director, Jeff Cannon, was standing five feet away from Dew when she was fatally shot. Woodham went on to wound seven others before leaving, intending to drive off campus and conduct another shooting at the nearby Pearl Junior High School. However, assistant principal Joel Myrick had retrieved a .45 pistol from the glove compartment of his truck and subdued Woodham inside his mother's car. Then Myrick demanded "Why did you shoot my kids?" to which Woodham replied, "Life has wronged me, sir."[2]




Parker Middle School dance shooting


The Parker Middle School dance shooting was an incident that occurred on April 24, 1998 at a restaurant in Edinboro, Pennsylvania, United States. 14-year-old Andrew Jerome Wurst fatally shot 48-year-old John Gillette, and wounded another teacher and two students[1] at Nick's Place (a nearby restaurant) during an 8th grade graduation dance.[2]

The shooting ended when the owner of Nick's Place, James Strand, intervened and confronted Wurst with his shotgun, ordering him to drop his weapon and later holding him at bay for eleven minutes.


LetThemEatRand's picture

For fuck's sake -- do we really need these mental gymnastics?  As ZH pointed out in an earlier article, far more people are killed by cars than guns (we could make cars safer and many assholes here argue against that, but that's another topic).  It's cost/benefit.  The benefit of individual gun ownership (like car ownership) overwhelmingly outweighs the cost of the occasional psycho who misuses them and goes on a rampage.  Think freedom, etc.  Can we all just stop with the "but you can kill with a knife too" silliness?  Or the "a good guy with a gun killed the bad guy with a gun" shit?   It just makes you look like a fool.   In a free society people can be armed.  Sometimes some asshole psycho will kill people with one.  It doesn't mean we all need to wear bullet proof vests or outlaw guns.   This is no consolation to the many people whose loved ones were killed in car accidents tonight, or the victims of the school shooting.  

fuu's picture

in 2007 99.9967% of guns in America didn't kill anybody.

Arthur Borges's picture

Oh Please! Let us imagine the Constitution and Bill of Rights give you an airtight case for overthrowing the USG. What are you going to do? Lay a minefield around your property, bunkerize your home and hole up inside it with a few buddies and lots of beer till you find some taxman or traffic cop to shoot at? How long would it take before a SWAT team took down your one-man republic?

Alternatively, you might want to organize an insurgency based up in the Appalachian Mountains or Catskills, eating squirrels and wild mushrooms until you felt brave and crazy enough to swoop down on Congress and the White House. How far do you think you would get before running up against a wall of police and soldiers looking very upset with the lot of you? 

dugorama's picture

yes, where it clearly states that 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

so, which well regulated militia do you belong to?  or did the child killer's mom belong to?

gnomon's picture

One good, properly executed swipe of a sword, (rather than being an idiot slasher like that guy in China probably was), will always more reliably kill a person than a single gunshot to any part of the body, head included. So much misinformation has been posted today by dilettantes. A properly executed knife/sword wound will inflict far more trauma with more cut arteries and nerves than what a single bullet of any size will do.

macholatte's picture


Facts and figures are irrelevant. Emotion is what counts. 300,000,000 law abiding citizens will be victimized by the media elite.


The arms shall be banned and confiscated!

"So let it be written. So let it be done."

klockwerks's picture

Sorry, never going to happen!!

Rubbish's picture

Exactly, I love guns, pet some of mine every day. Shoot once a week, great hobby.

Arthur Borges's picture

Well, a retired female officer friend of mine here once said that if she had to choose a weapon, it would be a long stick. But although I'm sure you're right about "a properly executed knife/sword inflict", this raises the issue of the perp's skill level. To cite another example, about 15 or 20 years ago, the Swedish police added academy training in how not to have your service weapon taken from you; this course was added at the expense of shooting practice on targets at 25 metres and beyond.

Like with any tool, what matters at least as much as the weapon is how well you can use it.

On the stabbings here in Henan, I'm still looking for more details, especially about police response time: it takes a lot of time to collar and stab 22 screaming kids running around in different directions at the same time. Shall I guess at least 22 minutes? The whole thing is still under investigation right now, so few details are being released.


Randall Cabot's picture

Maybe he watched Hollywood movies and TV:

Scroll to 2:05  minuite mark of the trailer for Django Unchained:

And from Saturday Night Live:

"I kill all the white people in the movie. How great is that?"

A Nanny Moose's picture

There is little evidence to support that hollywood/gaming results in such incidents. I would look to his chemical cocktails, physical/emotional abuse he may have suffered.

SMG's picture

This is Truth, everyone needs to know. Thanks for sharing it. 


"Were people shooting up classrooms in the 1960's? There were guns, we didn't have as many gun control laws then as we do now. No.  So what's different?  The psychotropic drugs, that's what different."

"[These psychiatrists] They are mainly just drug pushers."

"This isn't about helping people, it's about making money"

"Whenever a school shooter is taking these drugs, the media is told to ignore it.  They are told it is personal."

"How many deaths have to occur before people wake up?"

"Wake up, wake up, before it's too late."

The DRUGS are the root of this problem, stop this my fellow citizens. It's not too much freedom, it is us being poisoned.



jeff montanye's picture

you bring up an interesting point.  more diagnoses, more therapies.  true the bath disaster was in the 1920's, but the last three decades are like the prohibition era (alcohol in u.s. in the '20's; marijuana and cocaine in mexico and columbia since about 1980).  check out for some eye openers.  as one of the earlier u.s. killers noted (a female, atypically) i don't like mondays, this livens up the day.

the article notes:  Another reported similarity is that most of the perpetrators had been taking antidepressant drugs,[9][10][11] which have a documented history of producing violence and aggression as a side effect.[12][13]

palmereldritch's picture

Guns don’t kill people.  People kill people.

People on psycho-tropic drugs with easy access to guns can kill people in large numbers. fire.

Ban gasoline? And ban fire? Or educate society on the dangers of their explosive mix?

Edit:Or why not simply ban pyscho-tropic drugs.  As the video strongly argues, What has been added to society's mix since the sixties that was never there before?

jeff montanye's picture

i'm going with fewer suicides and personal pain and more murders, apparently.  my experience with psychopharmaceuticals as an observer is that 1. they keep many sane that had been extremely fucked up.  2. they are abused by those that really want just to get high and by those that will make money off selling to them.  the 3. which, thankfully, i haven't personally observed but which from the evidence may well be true, is that in a small minority of the treated, the drugs produce horrific side effects.  two steps forward, one step back?  one step forward, one step back ....  remains to be seen.  we are a proud but fallen creature.

palmereldritch's picture

There are merits to every argument except the simplistic and binary reductionism of extreme reaction.

So I guess banning psycho-tropic drugs would make as much sense as banning guns? Except psycho-tropic drugs are not an insurance policy against tyranny.

I suspect, less tyranny in the world would mean less of a demand for psycho-tropic drugs in many ways.  Ironic how the Second Amendment is so stealthily haunted and poisoned by its arch nemesis.

A link from the org producing the video above:

Recent Murders/Murder-Suicides Committed by Individuals on Psychiatric Drugs

10 recent murders and murder-suicides, resulting in 43 dead and 37 wounded:

Perhaps policing should start with the psychiatrists and the Big Pharma if the incidents of mass public killings as a lethal side effect are to decrease.

nmewn's picture

Never allow shrinks inside your head, they don't even know whats going on inside their own head. And get your kids off Ritalin, the life you save may be your own.

WarriorClass's picture

When violent shootings take place, honest journalists are forced to ask the question: “Does this fit the pattern of other staged shootings?” "Is there a mysterious 'second suspect' that disappears from coverage?" "Is the shooter mentally disabled and under mind control?" "Did the feds take over the investigation? from the local police?" "Was this a false flag?" "Who benefits?"


Apparently we have no honest journalists.

dugorama's picture

I don't think them dishonest so much as lazy.  and incompetent.  and perhaps of below average intelligence.

Arthur Borges's picture

Two points: (1) I fear that there "little evidence" because it hasn't been studied that much. (2) Another ill-studied area is potentiation, i.e. how one drug can enhance the effects of another drug when taken together. The research question is: What happens when a person on medication adds in a cough syrup, marijuana, bourbon and a few beers when he's in a bad mood. Allow that he mixes one tranquilizer with another because he's feeling extra jittery one day after an evening on meth, crack or whatever. All of these molecules will be interacting inside the body and different people respond differently to one same medication.

For example, there was a case in Taiwan a few years back where a perpetrator on a bus not only stabbed to death a fellow passenger and stranger, but proceeded to sever the victim's head. The other passengers managed to evacuate and the driver locked the man inside the vehicle until the police came. While waiting for the officers to turn up, the perp was holding the severed head up to the window and displaying it to onlookers.

Beyond the horror of the event, I suspect the explanation lies in potentiation from some cocktail of molecules he had ingested.




New England Patriot's picture

Or dude in question was possessed.

Cursive's picture



Ban video games before you ban guns.  It will never happen because the scum in hollywood are deeply involved in the gaming business. 

Amen, brother.  Activision wants you to know that there's a soldier in all of us.  Where are our liberal bretheren on this blatantly violent, onanastic fantasy world?




Freddie's picture

Tarentino bankrooled by the Weinstein brother at Miramax.  Not content to spew mega violent movies filled with cruelty and blood - they want to expand into race baiting.   Kill Bill now Kill Whitey.  These people are evil.  F TV and F Hollywood.

palmereldritch's picture

A conspiracy of easy profits.

The world's second oldest profession.

JOYFUL's picture

...Too many of these cases mass murders or assasinations by "loners" look like Manchurian Candidate mind control...

Affirmative. This pattern of selecting\grooming\activating 'loners' for employment by the Secret State in assassinations, honey traps, and assorted dirty tricks has been driving Merika's fate since at least the 50's...

Kennedy(s), MLK, Lennon, Reagan, et al, just the tip of the iceberg, one can safely presume, as the gun control agenda has employed countless other dupes in order to create the appropriate backlash.

Some time ago I suggested that readers look up the strange case of Kerry Thornley, (as documented in not only served as a Marine at the same U2 base in Japan as Oswald, but in the mentioned link provides the only documented evidence of the actual techniques and technicians(in this case Howard Hunt)employed in created the perfect 'patsy'...

on a wider level, Dave McGowan's( or fine work in documenting the entire vast culture conspiracy by which the sons and daughters of servicemen were enlisted into the effort to undermine the American Mind sets the standard for great investigative journalism of a kind that is usually only performed by practitioners of the double gunshot to the head type of suicide like the late Gary Webb...

GiantLizard's picture

You've obviously never been to Oz, or researched the statistics very thoroughly. The Youtube link you provide to back up your assertions is from one state in Australia (the second-least populous), and the quality of the video as well as uniforms/clothes worn suggest it was filmed well before 2000, using high selective quotes from the head of the Police Association which seem more to be aimed at the number  of police officers in the state rather than anything to do with violent crimes. The statistics quoted in the video are not referenced and seem to be contradicted by statistics produced by the Australian Institute of Criminology which shows that the number of homicides has declined in absolute terms while the population increased approximately 20% since the Port Arthur Massacre (which triggered the gun buy-back laws) in 1996, as have the rates of robbery. I think it would be safer to say that Australians are culturally somewhat similar to Canadians. Even then, the number of gun-related homicides (as well as homicides as a a proportion of total population) is a fraction of either the US or Canada.

Miffed Microbiologist's picture

You sited Charles Whitman the Austin tower shooter. Interestingly enough it was found on his autopsy that he had a glioblastoma brain tumor that probably had a significant part in this man's horrific actions. I recently has a work associate die from this type of tumor . His personality change was dramatic. Unfortunately there are many reasons people go on shooting rampages, gun control won't stop these occurrences but thank god they are rare events. Only thing one can do is prepare what you will do if it occurs and pray it never happens.