Shouldn’t There be Some Requirement that Congresscritters Know a Little American History?


Because otherwise, they sound like this bag of wadded up dick.

During a May appearance on Rachel Maddow Lean Forward Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said gun rights are not “God-given” and any claim that the Founding Fathers wanted U.S. citizens armed so they could repel a tyranny “is insane.”

As an atheist, I couldn’t care less what some drooling douchetard from Connecticut thinks was in the Almighty’s brain! But to claim that as a living entity, you have no right to defend yourself with the most effective tool on the market today is not just absurd, it’s cruel and inhumane.

But Murphy is a leftard, so it’s par for the course.

Murphy’s second claim is equally absurd.  The claim that the Founders wanted an armed citizenry to repel tyranny is “insane.” Yeah. Except for that long list of quotes and writings that clearly state just that.

Including Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist 28:

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power became usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions or districts, of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defence. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.

And the lengthy list of Founders’ quotes on the George Mason University’s website, to include:

“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
–Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

“Whereas civil-rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.”
— Tench Coxe, in Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.”
–Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).

In other words, Chris Murphy apparently didn’t take any history classes at Williams College.

Or, he simply partied through his basic American history requirements.

Cowards! The lot of you! (UPDATED!)


Scroll down for several updates.

First we hear about Dick’s sporting goods ceasing the sale of sporting rifles.

Then Cheaper Than Dirt got hammered on Facebook for their claim that they will be “reexamining” their sales policies in light of the tragedy at Sandy Hook, and after thousands upon thousands of promises from loyal customers to go elsewhere, they decided to resume sales.

Now Michigan’s governor decided to veto a concealed carry bill that he promised earlier to sign and that took a lot of effort to pass through the legislature.

And the NRA – they’re promising “…to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.

We’re all heartbroken over the massacre. We’re all appalled by the actions of one mental case. And we all want to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

Will someone please tell me how punishing millions of gun owners who DIDN’T kill anyone, harm anyone or commit any kind of crime with a firearm going to stop the nutcases from going on rampages?

Will someone please tell me how leaving thousands of people defenseless against armed thugs in Michigan will prevent another school tragedy?

Will someone please tell me how forcing law-abiding citizens to undergo mental evaluations before making a constitutionally-protected purchase will stop criminals, crazies and thugs from stealing firearms?

And finally, will someone please explain to me how banning firearms for their cosmetic features – perpetuating misinformation about what a semi-automatic weapon is  – or stopping sales of weapons that look scary, but are no more lethal than an average handgun – will prevent another massacre!

The only thing this does is show that there are way too many cowards who are afraid to stand on their principles in this country.

And that is pathetic.

UPDATE: I don’t say this lightly because Scott Brown is an honorable Soldier, but… from the land of Taxatwoshits comes this little bit that quotes Scott Brown as saying there should be “federal action” about “assault” weapons. What is really irritating is that Scott Brown ought to know better. He’s a Soldier. He should get the fact that the civilian version of military-style weapons are no different than any other semi-automatic. They don’t allow killing anything any faster than any pistol. One round is fired every time the trigger is pulled. ONE. And the differences are largely cosmetic. No, an military-style weapon won’t allow a crazed gunman to kill his victims any faster than any pistol. The bayonet lug and pistol grip and scary, black color are no more dangerous than anything else. And yet… the now largely irrelevant Scott Brown – beaten by Fauxcahontas Warren into obscurity in November – is now trying to low-crawl out of political obscurity with this dreck:

“What happened in Newtown where those children were subject to that level of violence is beyond my comprehension. As a state legislator in Massachusetts I supported an assault weapons ban thinking other states would follow suit. But unfortunately, they have not and innocent people are being killed,” Brown said. “As a result, I support a federal assault weapons ban, perhaps like the legislation we have in Massachusetts.”

OK, Colonel. You are now the enemy as well. You think joining leftarded asshats will revive your political career? Good luck. You WILL be opposed every step of the way. Might as well switch to the Democrat Party. No one wants you on our side.

UPDATE ZEE SECOND: Dimwit Virginia delegate will introduce an “assault” weapons ban.

The delegate said that semi-automatic/assault style weapons “have no place other than on the battlefield.” He also dismissed the claims that sportsmen need such weapons.

 “How is it ‘sport’ to go out and shoot Bambi using an assault rifle and accompanying 50 cartridge magazine?” said Morrissey.

Hey, douchebag! An AR uses .223 ammunition – good for shooting varmint. Most hunters don’t even think it’s good enough to shoot deer.


UPDATE ZEE THIRD: From the state that brought you the hanging chad comes a news piece that reports some Florida schools are banning backpacks. Yes. Bookbags.

No commentary needed from me.

Leftist ghouls salivating at the thought of relieving you of your rights


Dianne Feinstein has apparently been sitting on this bill for a year, obviously waiting for a massacre big enough that will allow her to stuff this rights-killing monstrosity up our collective asses. Well, the opportunistic swine got a massacre on Friday, and now she’s gleefully announcing she will introduce another “assault” weapons ban – the same kind that was allowed to expire in 2004 because it was apparently worthless.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein said she will reintroduce a ban on assault weapons to the Senate on the very first day the new House session on NBC’s Meet the Press. Feinstein also said she wants and expects  Barack Obama to lead on gun control from now on. “I can tell you that he is going to have a bill to lead on because as a first-day bill I’m going to introduce in the Senate and the same bill will be introduced in the House – a bill to ban assault weapons,” Feinstein said. “It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession.  Not retroactively but prospectively. And it will ban the same for big clips, drums or strips of more than 10 bullets.” There was a previous assault weapons ban from 1994 to 2004. There was some conversation about re-introducing the ban around the time of the Aurora shooting, too. “There will be a bill. We’ve been working on it now for a year,” Feinstein said. “We’ve tried to take my bill from ’94 to 2004 and perfect it. We believe we have.

The last “assault” weapons ban that banned scary things like bayonet lugs and pistol grips, because they’re… um… scary, did nothing to prevent tragedies like COLUMBINE! But that doesn’t matter to Feinstein and calculating, conniving cunts like Jerrold Nadler who not only danced in the blood of innocent children, gleeful at the opportunity to push through his political agenda, but demanded that the president EXPLOIT the tragedy in order to get gun control.

Make no mistake, people. You’re dealing with ruthless sociopaths, who will stop at nothing to ram their agenda down our throats. It’s not for the children! It’s not for our safety!

It’s to increase their own power and authority, as well as give the clueless boneheads who vote for them a warm fuzzy. And they will stop at nothing to do it.

Fight them with all you’ve got. It’s either their power or your rights. You can’t have both.

Fail to protect our children


President Obama gave a very moving speech at Newton, CT yesterday. I’m not being sarcastic here. You could tell how genuinely upset he was and how much it hurt to read the names of the children murdered in cold blood by derelict Adam Lanza. He spoke of the heroes who tried to protect the children at the school and the first responders who arrived on the scene and helped guide the kids to safety. And with anger and anguish in his voice he spoke of our failure to protect our children. Something must be done.

And by that measure, can we truly say, as a nation, that we are meeting our obligations?  Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children — all of them — safe from harm?  Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know that they are loved, and teaching them to love in return?  Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?

I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer is no.  We’re not doing enough.  And we will have to change.

Since I’ve been President, this is the fourth time we have come together to comfort a grieving community torn apart by a mass shooting.  The fourth time we’ve hugged survivors.  The fourth time we’ve consoled the families of victims.  And in between, there have been an endless series of deadly shootings across the country, almost daily reports of victims, many of them children, in small towns and big cities all across America — victims whose — much of the time, their only fault was being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

We can’t tolerate this anymore.  These tragedies must end.  And to end them, we must change.  We will be told that the causes of such violence are complex, and that is true.  No single law — no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world, or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society.

You’ll be surprised that I actually agree with the President here.

I agree that we’re not meeting our obligations to our children. We are not doing enough.

We have transformed our schools into disarmament zones and painted a bullseye on the back of every child and every teacher – ripe for every psychopath to ravage at will.

We have instilled in our society and our younger generations an “authorities will protect you” attitude, and relieved them of personal responsibility.

We have made them afraid, and with the media publicizing every shooting and giving the criminals and wackos the publicity they so desperately desire, stumbling over one another to get the “exclusive,” to publicize tragedy and to grip the audience, that fear is multiplied.

What we haven’t done, as the gun grabbers claim, is make it easy for criminals and crazies to purchase weapons.

Regular citizens have to comply with a plethora of regulations, including background checks and sometimes waiting periods, just to purchase a firearm. Fees, more background checks, sometimes fingerprints and justifications have to be provided to localities if they want to carry. Despite the fact that a tiny percentage of gun owners who purchased their firearms legally actually commit crimes, they are punished more and more by the system after any such tragedy.

Meanwhile, the majority of guns used in crime have been obtained via illegal means. Translation: criminals break the law, and violate the already-existing plethora of gun control laws to obtain their firearms.

I repeat: laws are for the law-abiding. More laws will only affect the law-abiding. That is logic that cannot be refuted, and yet politicians continue to clamor for more restrictions, more limits and more disarmament – as if banning a bayonet lug will somehow prevent a James Holmes or an Adam Lanza from mowing down young children.

But you know what will give potential victims even the slightest chance to live?

The same thing that stopped Luke Woodham from killing even more people in Pearl, MS in 1997.

Woodham drove his mother’s car to Pearl High School. Wearing an orange jumpsuit and a trenchcoat, 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.

The same thing that saved lives at the Appalachian School of Law in 2002.

According to Bridges: at the first sound of gunfire, he and fellow student Mikael Gross, unbeknownst to each other, ran to their vehicles to retrieve their personally-owned firearms[6] placed in their glove compartments. Mikael Gross, a police officer from Grifton, North Carolina retrieved a 9 mm pistol and body armor. Bridges, a county sheriff’s deputy from Asheville, North Carolina retrieved his .357 Magnum pistol from beneath the driver’s seat of his Chevrolet Tahoe. Bridges and Gross approached Odighizuwa from different angles, with Bridges yelling at Odighizuwa to drop his gun.[10] Odighizuwa then dropped his firearm and was subdued by several other unarmed students, including Ted Besen and Todd Ross.

The same thing that stopped terrorists from their stabbing spree in an Israeli school in 2008.

Two Palestinian terrorists disguised in Israel Defense Forces (IDF) uniforms entered the study hall at Makor Haim High School in Kibbutz Kfar Etzion southeast of Jerusalem.

Armed with guns and knives, the terrorists managed to stab several students before armed school counselors arrived and shot them dead.

The same thing that saved countless other lives: armed self defense.

But beyond that, we need to focus on the causes of these incidents, and I can guarantee you that the existence of guns and their ownership by decent, law-abiding Americans is not it.

Parents, please keep an eye on your kids! PLEASE!

Don’t let resentment and anger fester to the point of violence. Talk to them. Develop a relationship with them. Watch for changes in behavior and ensure that they trust you enough to tell you when something is wrong!

Teach them to respect human life and other people. Don’t ignore them. I realize work schedules and other things in life interfere, but don’t allow your relationship with your child to deteriorate. Love them. Enjoy your time with them and don’t allow them to deteriorate to the point of picking up a firearm and harming innocents!

Look, I work two jobs. I’m a single parent. I’m on the go from early morning until night. But I find time to talk to my kids. We have dinner together. We chat via text and on the phone or even email when I’m not home. I don’t let a day go by without having a conversation with both my kids. I watch their behavior. I offer help when needed. I don’t ignore them.

Teach them the value of personal responsibility, and show them love and discipline. Always.

They will be grateful, and so will society, because you will have raised them into stable, responsible adults.


1 Comment


It’s on


Yesterday, I insisted on keeping away from the political aspect of the Connecticut elementary school shooting. I felt it was exploitative to point out the folly of making “gun free” zones out of schools, and giving armed nutbags a building full of unarmed, unprotected victims. So I came home, hugged my kids and tried to understand. I talked to friends, and tried to stay away from politicizing the issue when the bodies of the victims weren’t even cold yet. But apparently, the gun-grabbing leftist scum didn’t feel the same way. They immediately covered themselves with the blood of innocent children and proceeded to chant about yet more gun control.

No matter what I said about having the human decency to just grieve, they wouldn’t stop. Even people whom I consider intelligent and rational went on a rampage about gun control, claiming that they’re merely looking for solutions.

Fine. You want to discuss politics? You want to discuss solutions? OK. Let’s discuss them.

Let’s discuss the fact that schools are prohibited zones – that no one is allowed to be armed on school grounds. Let’s discuss the fact that no one was armed that day, and that teachers and children died.

Let’s discuss the fact that the guns used in this crime were apparently stolen from the suspect’s mother. They weren’t purchased legally. As a matter of fact, most firearms – 80 PERCENT, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics – used in crimes are not purchased legally.

Let’s discuss the fact that as horrible as this massacre was, overall firearm-related crime has plummeted since 1993.


Let’s discuss the fact that after 1996, less than 10% of nonfatal violent crimes involved firearms.


And yet you still screech for yet more gun control. As if law-abiding citizens aren’t already being put through insane amounts of ridiculous rigamarole just to be able to exercise their Constitutional rights! Paperwork. Background checks. In some cases, waiting periods. Asking permission to carry. Paying a fee to do so. Being denied in some cases. This is how we treat fundamental rights in this country?

Give me a goddamn break!

How many federal, state and local gun control laws is enough? How many more do you think will stop murderous psychopaths?

The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein didn’t waste any time dipping himself into the blood of innocents and penning this supercilious piece of dreck, claiming 12 so-called “facts” about guns.

1. Shooting sprees are not rare in the United States.
Mother Jones has tracked and mapped every shooting spree in the last three decades. “Since 1982, there have been at least 61 mass murders carried out with firearms across the country, with the killings unfolding in 30 states from Massachusetts to Hawaii,” they found. And in most cases, the killers had obtained their weapons legally

This is 3.1 so-called “sprees” per year during the last 20 years – among nearly 300 million people. That’s actually very few for a nation this big. Mass shootings, according to current research, are actually fairly rare, even though the past two years have seen a pretty alarming increase.

In 2011 there were three such tragedies, including the Tucson shooting which injured Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.). In 2010, there was one killing classified as a mass shooting. And in 2009 there were four tragedies, among them, the Fort Hood massacre in Texas, in which Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire at a U.S. Army base.

Between the years of 2000 and 2004, however, there was either one mass-shooting incident or no incident each year. In 1999, the U.S. experienced five incidents, including the devastating Columbine massacre. And up until the 1970’s there were only one or two “spree-killings” in the 20th century, according to David Brooks’ estimates for The New York Times. Still, criminologist James Alan Fox from Northeastern University has said we can’t definitively say this year has seen a spike in mass killings.

2. Eleven of the 20 worst mass shootings in the last 50 years took place in the United States.

We’ve also had stabbings, vehicle accidents, gang violence, etc. We are a huge nation with a history of violence, as much as I hate to say it. We have more rampages in general, although our neighbor to the south, Mexico, has much bigger rates of violent crime, and only a single gun store in the entire country. Correlation between guns and violence? Not seeing one.

3. Lots of guns don’t necessarily mean lots of shootings, as you can see in Israel and Switzerland.*

As David Lamp writes at Cato, “In Israel and Switzerland, for example, a license to possess guns is available on demand to every law-abiding adult, and guns are easily obtainable in both nations. Both countries also allow widespread carrying of concealed firearms, and yet, admits Dr. Arthur Kellerman, one of the foremost medical advocates of gun control, Switzerland and Israel ‘have rates of homicide that are low despite rates of home firearm ownership that are at least as high as those in the United States.’”

*Correction: The info is out-of-date, if not completely wrong. Israel and Switzerland have tightened their gun laws substantially, and now pursue an entirely different approach than the United States. More details here. I apologize for the error.

While both nations have tightened gun control laws, they have not had mass murders on our scale even when gun control laws were more lax. So why does this matter? Additionally, comparing tiny little nations to one that has actual states much bigger than both of them combined, is a bit disingenuous.

4. Of the 11 deadliest shootings in the US, five have happened from 2007 onward.

That doesn’t include Friday’s shooting in Sandy Hook, Connecticut. The AP put the early reported death toll at 27, which would make it the second-deadliest mass shooting in US history.

That is correct. So? There are a ton of issues that have coincided with these events. Significant ones. The one thing that the criminals all have in common is mental illness. Should we control the crazies and lock them up, just in case? Some would definitely have a problem with that, especially if they haven’t committed any crimes.

5. America is an unusually violent country. But we’re not as violent as we used to be.

Kieran Healy, a sociologist at Duke University, made this graph of “deaths due to assault” in the United States and other developed countries. We are a clear outlier.

We have always been a violent nation, and we’re a more violent nation now. And yet, violence is on the decline despite the fact that gun ownership is on the rise, and has been for a number of years. So again, what is the point here?

6. The South is the most violent region in the United States.

In a subsequent post, Healy drilled further into the numbers and looked at deaths due to assault in different regions of the country. Just as the United States is a clear outlier in the international context, the South is a clear outlier in the national context

And? From what I can tell from that Mother Jones map referenced in the first point, mass murders/shooting sprees are pretty evenly spread out, and many are concentrated in places like California, New York and New Jersey – places with ostensibly some of the most stringent gun control laws in the nation.

7. Gun ownership in the United States is declining overall.

“For all the attention given to America’s culture of guns, ownership of firearms is at or near all-time lows,” writes political scientist Patrick Egan. The decline is most evident on the General Social Survey, though it also shows up on polling from Gallup, as you can see on this graph:

Not true. Gun ownership is on the rise.

And if it wasn’t, what does it say about Klein’s gun vilification theory that firearms violence is supposedly on the rise, while gun ownership is on the decline?

The bottom line, Egan writes, is that “long-term trends suggest that we are in fact currently experiencing a waning culture of guns and violence in the United States.”

No, what they suggest is that less and less people are willing to admit to being gun owners out of fear of being vilified.

8. More guns tend to mean more homicide.

The Harvard Injury Control Research Center assessed the literature on guns and homicide and found that there’s substantial evidence that indicates more guns means more murders. This holds true whether you’re looking at different countries or different states. Citations here.

Only one problem – the official statistics I cited above refute this theory. And it would be a bit more credible if it wasn’t perpetuated by well-known anti-gun zealots like Matthew Miller and David Hemenway, who have obvious biases and are less researchers than they are policy whores.

9. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.

Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive…

This is a load of crap. The highest firearm deaths occur in Washington, DC that has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country. But this, again, is twisted. Murder by gun is no more or less heinous than murder by other objects, such as knives, vehicles, etc. And when it comes to murder per 100,000 people, states with some of the most draconian gun control laws in the country are up there, including Maryland (#4) and California (#19).

10. Gun control, in general, has not been politically popular.

That’s because, for the most part, the American people understand that the Constitution protects our right to keep and bear arms from government zealots and those who would relieve us of our rights. They understand that an armed populace is the last line of defense against a tyrant, and they refuse to relinquish those rights to the desires of chickenshit cowards who think their little feelings and wants should trump a fundamental right.

11. But particular policies to control guns often are.

An August CNN/ORC poll asked respondents whether they favor or oppose a number of specific policies to restrict gun ownership. And when you drill down to that level, many policies, including banning the manufacture and possession of semi-automatic rifles, are popular.

I have participated in a number of those polls. They are simplistic. They are conducted by people who are uneducated about firearms, who don’t even know the difference between a clip and a magazine, and pose leading questions designed to arrive at a predisposed conclusion.

12. Shootings don’t tend to substantially affect views on gun control.

And yet, gun banners keep trying. It’s like they HOPE that the next shooting will be bad enough to cause a change.

So bring it, ghouls. Keep plying us with histrionic justifications. Keep crying about your “right” to “feel” safe, while you scream that everyone else should be left defenseless at the mercy of armed thugs. Keep irrationally claiming that disarming the law-abiding will somehow keep the criminals from getting firearms. Keep braying like the pathetic sheep you are.

Guns are not going away. They are here to stay, and you can’t turn back the clock and make them disappear.

You. Will. Not. Win.

School Nightmare (UPDATED!)


What kind of psycho would kill little elementary school kids?

Twenty-seven people, including 18 children, have been killed in a shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, according to the Associated Press.

The report cites an official with knowledge of the situation.

Sources told The Courant that there are at least 20 shooting victims. Many of the shootings took place in a kindergarten classroom, sources said.


The shooter is dead, according to police, and the school is now secure.

Questions remain, however. Who would want to kill little kids?

Please keep these people in your hearts, thoughts, prayers, etc.

UPDATE: It didn’t take long for festering pieces of dog excrement to crawl out from under their rocks and ridicule… RIDICULE… the shooting with sarcastic remarks about gun control! Way to score political points, dickhead! h/t: Twitchy

David Frum: Shooting at CT elementary school. Obviously, we need to lower the age limit for concealed carry so toddlers can defend themselves.

UPDATE 2: CBS reports the gunman was found dead inside the building from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, and that one of the adult victims is the suspect’s mother and a teacher at the school.

UPDATE 3: Another CBS report says the gunman was a 20 year old male from New Jersey. A .223 caliber rifle was found. A potential second shooter is in custody.

UPDATE 4: Frum is even more of an idiot than we originally thought. His latest Tweet: I won’t accept lectures about shooting “sensitivity” from those who enable the shootings in the first place

My reply: @davidfrum And I won’t accept idiotic sarcasm from someone who actually thinks law-abiding citizens who treasure their rights cause violence

Not enough characters left to spell out, “D-O-U-C-H-E-B-A-G”

UPDATE 4: Shooter identified as Adam Lanza; younger brother is being held for questioning as a possible second shooter. Ryan Lanza was widely reported to have been the shooter initially.

UPDATE 5: Fox reports both parents of Adam Lanza, 24, were found dead at separate locations after he opened fire at the school.

UPDATE 6: As a friend has stated, monsters are not just American.

Twenty two children stabbed at a Chinese elementary school.


%d bloggers like this: