I won't protest any laws congressmen are bringing to the table regarding bans of assault weapons, BUT it's still unconstitutional. Sure, nobody //needs// an AK-47 but if a law abiding citizen has the money to purchase one, they have every right to. And call me heartless, but the person to blame for the Newtown shooting was the mother of Adam Lanza for giving her mentally unstable son access to such weapons. There is no need to take away rights of others because of this. It's like when a teacher punishes the whole class for something one student did. It's simply unfair.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

adam lanza murdered his mother then took her guns. i didnt know that ws called giving him access

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Where did he obtain the gun he shot her with? However he got it was because he had access to it and even though she taught him how to use weapons carefully and responsibly, he was still her responsibility.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

He was 20. He wasn't his mother's responsibility. He was an adult; mentally unstable or not, he knew what he was doing.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So when every mentally ill person turns 18 they magically know what they're doing because they're adults?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

No, not every mentally unstable person, but Adam Lanza did. He had asperger’s and a personality disorder and he came off as a highly disturbed man. There are thousands of other people just like him who don't harm others. Not everything can be blamed on his mental state. Does America need a better way to help those with mental illnesses? Of course. But is mental illness an excuse for this man? I don't think so.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I'm saying guns shouldn't have been easy for him to get due to his mental state. Being that the guns belonged to his mother, it was her responsibility to keep them away from him; not the American people.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Anyone could break into my house right this moment, steal my gun, and shoot me. That doesn't mean it was my fault for not locking up my gun. There are never any children in the house. I keep my gun out so it's easy to get to in case of an emergency. If I locked it up and was getting attacked, I doubt an attacker would give me time to get my gun out. I'm sure that's why many people, including his mom, don't lock up their guns.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

What about the people who hide their emotions about these things. There are many children who are socially awkward, yet they don't kill anyone. The mom most likely didn't know that her son was mentally unstable. She probably also didn't know that their were even guns in the house. By what I've heard about her, she was very strict and always tried to do the best for her children. If she knew that he was this way, I'm sure she would have tried to get him help.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

She knew he was mentally ill and she did try helping him. I'm not saying she's a bad person. Mistakes happen and unfortunately she made it able for him to easily obtain the weapons. But she's still to blame.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Hey don't forget that the constitution was written 224 years ago when people use to hunt and protect themselves against Amerindians. I believe the world have evolved and so should the constitution. I don't really care what happens with those laws in the US since I don't live there but that is what I think

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Does that make the 1st amendment irrelevant too? Soldiers work for the government and the government is supposed to work for the people. If soldiers can have these types of weapons, why can't citizens? I'm not saying that the world would be safer if everybody carried around a gun. I'm just saying that taking rights away from responsible citizens isn't the solution.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Now we hunt and protect ourselves from abhorrent bastards that come to shoot up our children's schools

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Needs less down-votes. And do we know exactly what type of mental disorder he had? Some are saying Asperger's, but that just doesn't seem to fit. My friend has been diagnosed with Asperger's and certainly isn't unstable. I more than likely have it, and I'm absolutely not unstable. It's not a disease that makes you crazy, it just makes it hard to socialize and makes you a very logical person. That's a grossly basic explanation, but still. If he had a disease that made him unfit to own a firearm, it was somewhat unlawful storage to allow him to have access to them. More people need safes for storing their firearms.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I say the sorry ass government should concentrate on health care for these sick people we have the poorest mental health programs hands down gun laws are strict enough if there was stricter laws these people plot to do these things they will find a way to obtain a gun with or without laws WAKE UP AMERICA the govt the problem

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Exactly. You don't blame a car for an accident when there's a drunk driver behind the wheel

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Just curious.. would you say that the bar tender deserves any amount of blame?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Maybe some moral blame. But he didn't force the drinks down his throat or make him drive so the driver is still responsible. I feel like the analogy might be going too far

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You're right. Unless a blanket ban was put on all guns, this still could have happened. I'm using the Australian laws as an example, but AFAIK all the guns that he had could have been acquired legally here. And that's honestly kind of scary.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If he had just a 9mm, this would not have happened the way it did. Nobody needs assault weapons. Yes we have the 2nd amendment in the USA and that's all fine and dandy but no civilian should have the same access to guns as the military. They don't have the training and they don't have the psychological testing to even be allowed to use them. In fact, a school attack happened the same day in China. He only had a knife bc China bans guns. NOT one person got killed. Doesnt mean I support a ban on all weapons, but at least the ones that are most deadly. The 2nd amendment wasnt created for the type of purpose people use it for now.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Nobody //needs// a lot of things they have. A tv in every bedroom, a computer, the internet, unlimited data, etc. If you asked me why some Americans like to buy assault rifles, I'd say they don't intend to use them for self-defense but because they simply collect guns as a hobby. I don't find the military to be any more qualified than citizens to possess these powerful firearms. After all, it is the military that's supposed to be working for us and yet the government sends them overseas to fight a war that the majority don't agree with. Thousands of innocent men, women, and children have died at the expense of the U.S. and the news doesn't say a word, yet when something like this happens everyone gets in an uproar.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That's a bold statement. 9mm pistols nowadays come standard with a 15-17 round magazine, and it's quicker to reload a pistol than it is to reload a rifle. It actually makes me sick how many people are throwing around the term "assault weapon". Could you define to me right now what an assault weapon is? No, you couldn't, because it's not an actual thing. It's a scare tactic by the media, because "sporting rifle" doesn't rile people up quite as much. "Yes we have the 2nd amendment in the USA and that's all fine and dandy but no civilian should have the same access to guns as the military." All of my WAT. The //purpose// of the second amendment is to give people the same access to weapons as the military in order to stand up to the Government should we feel the need. And why is the military automatically more capable of handling these weapons than citizens are? The military are murdering the shit out civilians overseas for fun. They're people, too, and just as fucked up as we are.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

"The purpose of the second amendment is to give people the same access to weapons as the military in order to stand up to the Government should we feel the need." -Mike_Hawk I'd just like to say you're exactly right, and people frequently miss this context. The second amendment exists in no small part to assure that the Government is kept in check by it's people. I would be terrified to live in Europe (for example) where gun laws are far more strict. If their government were to decide to revert to monarchy or something, and the military was behind them, the Citizenry would be powerless to stop them. In America if the government were to attempt something like this, the armed Citizens would stop it from happening.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Crazy people are going to do crazy things, anyway.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

HULLO!!!!!!!..It was a made for TV movie against guns....and the second amendment. That Sandy Hook elementary school had been vacated and closed forhttps://www.amirite.com/following five years....the perfect backdrop for the movie....It was closed due to obsolescence....do your homework people....You were duped.....

by Anonymous 5 years ago