Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Emails reportedly show history of illness in Adam Lanza's family

Instead of focusing on gun control, we should be focusing on mental health. Mental health issues killed those kids at Sandy Hook, not guns. Guns were about as responsible for the killings at Sandy Hook or Columbine as a pencil was responsible for creating "A Tale of Two Cities" or "Moby Dick".

The mother of Newtown school gunman Adam Lanza reportedly told friends about a genetic disorder that killed her grandfather, nearly took her own life and had already manifested itself in her son.
In emails and private chats, Nancy Lanza said her son had been diagnosed with a form of Asperger’s syndrome -- a sensory perception disorder that prevented him from recognizing pain and led him to recoil from physical touch, the New York Daily News reports.
“Nancy indicated that Adam’s issues were genetic like hers,” friend Marvin LaFontaine told the newspaper.
Lanza, in hundreds of emails obtained by the newspaper, indicated that doctors had no explanation for the autoimmune disorder that killed her grandfather in just six weeks. Doctors found lesions on her brain in 1999 and Nancy Lanza characterized her illness as “like living on top of a time bomb.”
“I am carrying the gene for this type of self-destruct,” she emailed LaFontaine at the time. “My diagnosis was not good. I was going under the premise that I had a limited time left . . . about enough to get the boys settled in. . . . At one point I was trying to deal with the time frame of about 12 months.”
The disease had gone into remission, but Lanza told a friend in January 2012 it had “flared up.” By November, she realized her son’s troubles were deeper than just genetics. Just two weeks before the Newtown shooting, Nancy discovered pictures in her son’s room featuring dead bodies, but she did not confront him.
“One (drawing) had a woman clutching a religious item, like rosary beads, and holding a child, and she was getting all shot up in the back with blood flying everywhere,” LaFontaine said. “Nancy was disturbed, really disturbed, but didn’t confront him … She wanted to think it over.”
Adam Lanza, 20, fatally shot his mother before killing 26 more people during a rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/08/emails-reportedly-show-history-illness-in-adam-lanza-family/?test=latestnews#ixzz2PyCmg4iy

PoliceOne Gun Control Survey: Are legally-armed citizens the best solution to gun violence?

When it comes to reducing gun violence in America, nobody else in the country has anything close to the experience-based perspective from which cops can speak.

PoliceOne has scored a major scoop in police journalism by conducting a survey of more than 15,000 law enforcers regarding their thoughts on gun control in America.
These men and women — most of whom actually work the street — have a front row seat to see gun violence in America. They put their lives at risk when they do their jobs, actually coming face-to-face with violent encounters involving firearms.
And when it comes to finding ways to reduce gun violence and large scale shootings, most cops say a federal ban on so-called “assault weapons” isn’t the answer.
More than 91 percent of respondents say it would either have no effect or a negative effect in reducing violent crime.  This is an overwhelming response by those whose job it is to actually deal with this issue on the front lines.
Instead, it is interesting to note that armed citizens show up frequently as a deciding factor in reducing the carnage from a mass murder situation; proactive choices dominate over gun and magazine restrictions and bans.
More than 91 percent of respondents support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable.
A full 86 percent feel that casualties would have been reduced or avoided in recent tragedies like Newtown and Aurora if a legally-armed citizen was present (casualties reduced: 80 percent; avoided altogether: 60 percent).
For those who chose the option of casualties being avoided altogether, I took this to mean the deterrent effect of a show of force prior to an event would stop a potential predator from carrying out his murderous intent in the first place.
What checks the sociopath from completing his act is fear. Fear of the unknown or known gun carrier who is going to punch his ticket to hell right then and right there. This has an immediate effect on reducing violent criminal activity.
Cops on the street know the value of officer presence and being ready to go. Criminals see it too, and stay in check. I know from my own street experience how being in shape, being well prepared along with a sharp uniform appearance kept things from escalating time and time again.
More than 81 percent of respondents were in favor of arming teachers and school administrators if they were properly trained and vetted or at least proficient.
Yet, with a few notable exceptions, most teachers and school officials are opposed to this measure. Overcoming this kind of resistance will be a major roadblock to making our schools safer.
In addition, the survey asked, “On a scale of one to five — one being low and five being high — how important do you think legally-armed citizens are to reducing crime rates overall?”
Three quarters of you (75 percent) answered either four or five, with more than 50 percent answering five.
What would help most in preventing large scale shootings in public? The most popular answer among respondents – at 29 percent – was “more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians,” while 20 percent choose “more-aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons.”
More armed guards/paid security personnel (16 percent) and improved background screening to determine mental wellness of gun purchasers (14 percent) were the other two preventative measures most selected in the poll. 
Clearly we have a majority of our gun carrying, member officers who feel that armed citizens are an asset in reducing violent crime and not a liability. This will be refreshing news for armed citizens who wonder about police attitudes in general on concealed carry.
From all ranks, from Sheriffs and Chiefs on down, the vast majority (95 percent) say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.  
This is in sharp contrast to my own home state of Colorado, where the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police stood in support of the magazine ban and other restrictions while many Sheriffs bluntly said in the press that they would not enforce any bans on magazines or so called assault weapons.
I will allow myself one personal observation. If you want to disarm yourself, that is your choice. The following quote is a favorite of mine and something to keep in mind when you make that choice.
“Sheep don’t tell wolves what’s for dinner.”