Gun Control

Ouch!
Host Of TV Gun Show ‘A Rifleman’s Journal’ Shot And Killed

Quote :

The host of The Sportsman Channel’s “A Rifleman’s Journal” was shot and killed in Montana on Friday. The gunman, seemingly a jealous husband, then turned the weapon on himself.

It is not yet clear if the weapon used in the crime was obtained legally.

Gregory Rodriguez not only hosted his own hunting show. He was also an editor of Shooting Times and wrote for Guns & Ammo magazine. He was also the CEO of Global Adventure Outfitters, a hunting supply store. But that all ended Friday after the gunman found Rodriguez with his wife, who works an ammunitions manufacturer, together:

Quote :

Police say that at around 10:30 p.m. the woman’s husband, Wayne Bengston, came to the house and then shot Rodriguez and brutally beat his wife.

Police say Bengston then drove off with his 2-year old son who had been sleeping in the house and drove away.

He left the boy unharmed with a relative and then drove to his house in West Glacier.

That’s where Flathead County deputies and a SWAT team found his truck.

Authorities say they attempted to contact Bengston with no success, and when they entered his house they found Bengston dead of a gunshot wound to the head.

The episode is a tragic reminder that even responsible gun owners can find themselves at the mercy of an unhinged gunman, and that National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre’s claim that, “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” doesn’t always hold up.

Rogriguez’s show was hunting-specific, but the Sportsman Channel does have a relationship with the National Rifle Association and its lobbying arm.

To the best of my knowledge, this is not from The Onion.
A bill such as this has only become necessary due to the fact that someone put liberals in charge.


http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2013/03/08/so-called-pastry-bill-would-protect-young-children-who-form-finger-food-in-shape-of-gun/

Under Proposed Bill, Students Who Form Finger In Shape Of Gun Would Not Be Suspended
March 8, 2013 6:35 PM

BALTIMORE (WJZ) — Zero tolerance for zero tolerance. That’s how one lawmaker feels about young children being suspended from school for forming their finger or food in the shape of a gun.
As Gigi Barnett explains, he has a bill designed to keep students in class if they’re caught.
State Senator J.B. Jennings says he does not intend for this bill to be a part of the growing gun debate in Maryland, but he does say he wants it to bring some common sense discipline to state schools.
Anne Arundel County school leaders suspended 7-year-old Joshua Welch last week for eating a pastry in the shape of a gun.
“When you compare the caliber of the offense to the caliber of the punishment, they don’t match up,” the boy’s father said.
Back in January, 6-year-old Rodney Lynch received the same punishment for forming his fingers in the shape of a gun. Montgomery County school leaders sent Rodney home for two days.
“These kids are 6 or 7-years-old. They don’t understand what they’re doing,” said Sen. J.B. Jennings.
State Senator J.B. Jennings says zero tolerance rules on school campuses are going too far, so he wrote a bill. It bans school leaders from suspending students who make the shape of a gun with their fingers or food, or students who draw a gun on a piece of paper.
“If it’s done in a violent manner, then yes, we can take it to the next level. We can look at suspension,” said Jennings.
Jennings says his office has received several calls from parents who fear that a suspension in elementary school will mar their children’s academic career.
“So the parents are the one’s who’ve had concerns saying ‘okay, now my kid has to carry this.’ So when they get into middle school and they start placing them in classes, they’re going to look and say ‘well wait a minute, this kid has been suspended when he was in second grade.’ And he’s always going to be looked at as ‘what did he do?’” Jennings said.
If the bill passes and a student is caught forming their food or fingers in the shape of a gun, they would be sent to a counselor’s office first–not suspension.
Jennings says the bill is heading to the Education Committee. If it passes, it goes to the full Senate for a vote.

happy jack wrote:

I already commented on the substance of your post, several posts back:

Quote :

Dickey is not blocking anything now.
What is your problem with him?

No, you didn't. How can a preceding post be a response to the one following it?

What do you think of Dickey? How can he be regarded as anything other than a corporate shill like Inhofe or any other global warming denialist?

Heretic wrote:

happy jack wrote:

I already commented on the substance of your post, several posts back:

Quote :

Dickey is not blocking anything now.
What is your problem with him?

No, you didn't. How can a preceding post be a response to the one following it?

What do you think of Dickey? How can he be regarded as anything other than a corporate shill like Inhofe or any other global warming denialist?

I don't think anything about Dickey. To be truthful, I don't recall ever hearing his name until you brought it up in this thread. All I need to know about him in this context is that he is in favor of research on this issue.

He (Dickey) and Rosenberg said they have modified their views over time and now both agree that research is needed. They put out a joint statement Wednesday urging research that prevents firearm injuries while also protecting the rights "of legitimate gun owners."
"We ought to research the whole environment, both sides - what the benefits of having guns are and what are the benefits of not having guns," Dickey said. "We should study any part of this problem," including whether armed guards at schools would help, as the National Rifle Association has suggested.

You also appear to be in favor of research on this issue, so my question to you was, and is:

happy jack wrote:

Dickey is not blocking anything now.
What is your problem with him?

happy jack wrote:

I don't think anything about Dickey. To be truthful, I don't recall ever hearing his name until you brought it up in this thread.

Then try being an adult and form your own opinion for once.

happy jack wrote:

All I need to know about him in this context is that he is in favor of research on this issue.

Yes, now. "No more research needed" is an untenable position on almost every issue, especially on one where there is so little research to being with. Does one's history have no longer have any bearing on their character? Do decade late conversions undo all that came before? If Dickey had been an antivaxer, or an AIDS denialist, and blocked the relevant research (and subsequent policy) only to recently convert, would you be so completely indifferent?

happy jack wrote:

You also appear to be in favor of research on this issue, so my question to you was, and is:

happy jack wrote:
Dickey is not blocking anything now.
What is your problem with him?

All of which was answered, several times now, above. I can't tell if you can't see it, are having trouble reading, or are simply being a dick.

happy jack wrote:

What would he need to do in order to satisfy you?

You're seriously over thinking this. You're the one who asked:

Quote :

What is your problem with him?

Remember? Asked and answered. Simply don't like the guy since he was a corporate stooge and it took him over a decade to figure it out. I won't be throwing Inhofe, Ray Comfort, or any other antiscience hack any parades if/when they finally start accepting reality. Surely that's not too difficult for you to understand.

Here's an article I wrote for a larger audience. Comments?
http://www.policymic.com/articles/30870/gun-control-debate-2013-california-targets-criminals-by-taking-their-guns/416756
California is currently the only state in the country which has created a centralized database of all firearms purchases within the state. This database allows the state to retrieve guns from gun owners who legally purchased guns but are longer legally entitled to own guns because of subsequent criminal convictions, mental illness, or domestic abuse.

In the five years since the law creating the database was passed, over 10,000 weapons have been taken and destroyed. In many cases, the gun owner who illegally possessed the firearm is also arrested and charged with a felony. This is good public safety policy because it is a form of crime control, not gun control. It takes guns out of the hands of criminals and puts them behind bars while allowing law-abiding citizens to own guns for self-defense and sporting use. Additionally, the law requires that the prohibited person has no access to weapons, so all weapons in the home where the person resides must be surrendered or forfeited.

This approach of crime control rather than gun control is supported by gun owners. Sam Paredes, executive director of the Folsom-based advocacy group Gun Owners of California, praised the program, though not how it is funded. "We think that crime control instead of gun control is absolutely the way to go," he said. "The issue we have is funding this program only from resources from law-abiding gun purchasers. This program has a benefit to the entire public and therefore the entire public should be paying through general fund expenditures, and not just legal gun owners."

Currently, the weapons retrieval program is paid for with fees paid by buyers to gun dealers for background checks. California is planning on adding more officers to the existing California Department of Justice task force of 33 to speed up the retrieval of weapons from an estimated 20,000 individuals who are no longer legally allowed to possess weapons. This kind of policy that targets criminals instead of guns, and can make us a safer country.

sparks wrote:

California is currently the only state in the country which has created a centralized database of all firearms purchases within the state. This database allows the state to retrieve guns from gun owners who legally purchased guns but are longer legally entitled to own guns because of subsequent criminal convictions, mental illness, or domestic abuse.

In the five years since the law creating the database was passed, over 10,000 weapons have been taken and destroyed. In many cases, the gun owner who illegally possessed the firearm is also arrested and charged with a felony. This is good public safety policy because it is a form of crime control, not gun control. It takes guns out of the hands of criminals and puts them behind bars while allowing law-abiding citizens to own guns for self-defense and sporting use. Additionally, the law requires that the prohibited person has no access to weapons, so all weapons in the home where the person resides must be surrendered or forfeited.

Yeah. Well I'm not sure that I like the idea of "charging people with a felony." If an individual was not committing a crime when they purchased a weapon, then they shouldn't be charged with anything simply because they "are no longer entitled" to own it. I checked out the other link that you posted...

California Seizes Guns as Owners Lose Right to Keep Arms


California Department of Justice police agents walk towards a house near Ontario, California on Tuesday, March 5, 2013. The agents, working for the only state-level program to confiscate illegal firearms from owners, targeted people who’d once legally purchased firearms and lost the right after being convicted of violent crimes, committed to mental institutions or hit with restraining orders.

So do you happen to know if these people just have to "forfeit" their property without any type of compensation? If so, I can't in good conscience support that, either.

happy jack wrote:

Overall, not bad, but this is problematic:

sparks wrote:

Additionally, the law requires that the prohibited person has no access to weapons, so all weapons in the home where the person resides must be surrendered or forfeited.

Someone living in a home with a potentially violent person may be just the person who really needs a gun for his or her own protection. Taking that option out of their hands, and/or criminalizing them for exercising a perfectly legitimate constitutional right, doesn't sit well.

The reason guns are retrieved is because the person living in the home has lost the right to have a weapon. It's meaningless to retrieve guns from the criminal and still allow him access to weapons other people in the home own. Most rational people who are facing a family member who has the potential to be violent are going to keep their weapon and move to a safer living situation.

Scorpion wrote:

sparks wrote:

California is currently the only state in the country which has created a centralized database of all firearms purchases within the state. This database allows the state to retrieve guns from gun owners who legally purchased guns but are longer legally entitled to own guns because of subsequent criminal convictions, mental illness, or domestic abuse.

In the five years since the law creating the database was passed, over 10,000 weapons have been taken and destroyed. In many cases, the gun owner who illegally possessed the firearm is also arrested and charged with a felony. This is good public safety policy because it is a form of crime control, not gun control. It takes guns out of the hands of criminals and puts them behind bars while allowing law-abiding citizens to own guns for self-defense and sporting use. Additionally, the law requires that the prohibited person has no access to weapons, so all weapons in the home where the person resides must be surrendered or forfeited.

Yeah. Well I'm not sure that I like the idea of "charging people with a felony." If an individual was not committing a crime when they purchased a weapon, then they shouldn't be charged with anything simply because they "are no longer entitled" to own it. I checked out the other link that you posted...

California Seizes Guns as Owners Lose Right to Keep Arms


California Department of Justice police agents walk towards a house near Ontario, California on Tuesday, March 5, 2013. The agents, working for the only state-level program to confiscate illegal firearms from owners, targeted people who’d once legally purchased firearms and lost the right after being convicted of violent crimes, committed to mental institutions or hit with restraining orders.

So do you happen to know if these people just have to "forfeit" their property without any type of compensation? If so, I can't in good conscience support that, either.

Thanks for reading my article,Scorpion. The people who are subject to the forfeiture program have all been a defendant in a criminal proceeding, a mental health hearing or have received a domestic violence restraining order.As part of the hearing, they are told their legal options. They can sell the weapons to licensed gun dealer or surrender them. This program targets prohibited people who have not complied with their court order. I can't say I have much sympathy for criminals not receiving compensation for their weapons. How often do victims of crimes receive compensation for the physical harm criminals cause?

sparks wrote:

Thanks for reading my article,Scorpion. The people who are subject to the forfeiture program have all
been a defendant in a criminal proceeding, a mental health hearing or have received a domestic violence restraining order.
As part of the hearing, they are told their legal options. They can sell the weapons to licensed gun dealer or surrender them.
This program targets prohibited people who have not complied with their court order.

Where are you getting your information from? I looked around a bit and I can't find anything that supports your contention about a "hearing" where people are advised about their legal "options."

In this article...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-12/california-seizes-guns-as-owners-lose-right-to-bear-arms.html

....it specifically states that names are added to the "list" on a daily basis, as part of a data processing update.

Quote :

The no-gun list is compiled by cross-referencing files on almost 1 million handgun and assault-weapon owners with databases of new criminal records and involuntary mental-health commitments. About 15 to 20 names are added each day, according to the attorney general’s office.

I followed a link in the story to a copy of the law...

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12010.php

And I don't see any reference to a "hearing" of any kind. Do you?

If you have some additional info that backs up your claim, please post it.

sparks wrote:

I can't say I have much sympathy for criminals not receiving compensation for their weapons. How often do victims of crimes receive compensation for the physical harm criminals cause?

I think it goes without saying that violent felons shouldn't be able to possess weapons.

It's the rest of this law that troubles me. Like I said, if you have some additional information about it, I'd sure like to see it.

Thanks!

Classy gentleman, this Mitchell.



http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/03/post_44.html

Alabama lawmaker's email: 'Slave-holding, murdering, adulterous, baby-raping, snaggle-toothed kin folk'

By George Talbot | gtalbot@al.com
on March 27, 2013 at 9:07 AM, updated March 27, 2013 at 6:58 PM

Rep. Joe Mitchell
State Rep. Joe Mitchell, D-Mobile, had an outlandish exchange via email with a Jefferson County man who asked him and other lawmakers not to pass any laws that would restrict gun ownership.
Eddie Maxwell sent a mass email to state legislators at 10:54 p.m. on Jan. 27, warning them that even attempting to introduce a gun control bill was, in his opinion, a violation of state law.
Mitchell responded from his public, ALHouse.gov email account at 11:59 p.m., telling Maxwell: "Your folk never used all this sheit (sic) to protect my folk from your slave-holding, murdering, adulterous, baby-raping, incestuous, snaggle-toothed, backward-a**ed, inbreed (sic), imported criminal-minded kin folk."
"That’s not the type of reply I expect to receive from a state legislator," Maxwell replied on Feb. 11. "I’m not a racist and I find your reply to be especially offensive considering the position you hold."
Copies of the email exchange were provided to AL.com by state lawmakers who were included in the correspondence. The emails are printed below, edited only to remove the specific addresses.
Mitchell, who is black, did not respond to email and telephone messages from AL.com seeking comment this week. He told the Associated Press today that he was explaining that citizens who descended from slaves and were disenfranchised by the state constitution have a different view of history and the constitution than white citizens.
Maxwell, who is white, verified that he wrote the messages sent from his email address and said he was "surprised at the racial tones" in Mitchell's responses.
He said the exchange was the first and only contact he's had with Mitchell, who has served in the state House since 1994.
"It just makes me more determined that we the people need to stay involved," Maxwell said in a telephone interview today. "It's up to us as citizens to watch our government."
Maxwell, a retired coal miner, said he'd heard from two state lawmakers who told him they regretted Mitchell's comments. One of them was state Rep. Patricia Todd, D-Birmingham, who said in a Feb. 11 email to Maxwell that "this member hears you loud and clear."
"I just received this chain of emails and wanted to let you know that I am with you on the gun issue and am saddened by the tone of my colleagues email," Todd wrote, copying all members of the legislature, including Mitchell. "All of us have suffered from the racism of the past and I thank you for your civic and thoughtful response."
Maxwell said he hoped that legislative leaders would discipline Mitchell for his comments.
"I think (Mitchell) needs to be called in to face his actions. I think he at least needs to be questioned about it," he said.
Eddie Maxwell (photo provided by Eddie Maxwell)


Here are copies of the emails, as provided to AL.com:

From: Eddie Maxwell
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 10:54 PM
To: (all members of state legislature)
Subject: Gun Control and our Constitutions
Can the officers of our state government change our constitution when the change is forbidden by the people? The Supreme Court of Alabama has ruled that it cannot in an opinion dealing with another matter where change is forbidden. You have sworn to support our constitution. You have defined a violation of an oath in an official proceeding as a class C felony (C.O.A. Section 13A-10-101 Perjury in the first degree).
Do not violate your oath of office by introducing additional gun control bills or by allowing those already enacted to remain in the body of our laws.


From: Representative Joseph Mitchell
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 11:59 PM
To: Eddie Maxwell
cc: (all members)
Subject: Re: Gun Control and our Constitutions
Hey man. You have used the word ‘except’ when I think you mean somethin’ else.
Hey man. Your folk never used all this sheit to protect my folk from your slave-holding, murdering, adulterous, baby-raping, incestuous, snaggle-toothed, backward-a**ed, inbreed, imported criminal-minded kin folk. You can keep sending me stuff like you have however because it helps me explain to my constituents why they should protect that 2nd amendment thing AFTER we finish stocking up on spare parts, munitions and the like.
Bring it. As one of my friends in the Alabama Senate suggested – “BRING IT!!!!”
JOSEPHm, a prepper (’70-’13)
Mobile County


From: Eddie Maxwell
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 2:23 PM
To: Representative Joseph Mitchell
cc: (all members)
Subject: Re: Gun Control and our Constitutions
Rep. Mitchell and other members of the Legislature of Alabama,
That’s not the type of reply I expect to receive from a state legislator. The lack of response to your racist comments from your fellow members speaks volumes about the state of our legislature as a whole.
I’m not a racist and I find your reply to be especially offensive considering the position you hold.
My parents and grandparents taught me to love God and my fellow man as myself. My father was threatened by members of his church back in 1954 for inviting a black family to attend the church he pastored.
My father-in-law was threatened when he hired a young negro man to work in his shop back in 1968 in a community where several neighbors were members of the Ku Klux Klan. He didn’t allow those threats to keep him from treating people of all races equally.
In 1969, I was a draftee in the US Army and bunked with a young negro man named Earl Shinholster at Fort Benning. Earl later became a prominent leader of the NAACP back home in Georgia after serving with me in the Army. When I received numerous racist threats from negroes who knew I lived near Birmingham, Earl warned me of the knives they carried and cautioned me to be more careful around them. Earl had been watching me and he had come to know and respect me for my Christian values. Earl and I became friends and he helped me get through some tough times there.
Racism is not exclusive to my own people. I learned that before 1955. It is just as ugly now as it was then, regardless of the race of the person who is consumed by it.
I love my country and my state, and I vowed to support and defend our constitutions. I expect you and all of our representative to do the same.
Sincerely,
Eddie Maxwell


From: Patricia Todd
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 4:41 PM
To: Eddie Maxwell
Cc: (all members)
Subject: Re: Gun Control and our Constitutions
Mr. Maxwell:
I am Patricia Todd, a member of the house. I just received this chain of emails and wanted to let you know that I am with you on the gun issue and am saddened by the tone of my colleagues email. All of us have suffered from the racism of the past and I thank you for your civic and thoughtful response.
We all have different life experience that shapes our values. I pray that we can all respect, and, celebrate, our differences. That is what make America the greatest country on earth, scars and all.
This member hears you loud and clear.


From: Representative Joseph Mitchell
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 5:09 PM
To: Eddie Maxwell
cc: (all members)
Subject: Re: Gun Control and our Constitutions
Eddie. I grew up in Albany Ga. I was a military brat for most of my youth. Air Jump Master and DI USMC. Because I preference my issues with the values that I learned in ‘the heat of battle’ during the mid-fifties through the ‘70’s and into today might tell you what and who I am. I find no need to define it or explain it to you because you can identify with the threats of reprisals against your folk for helping somebody of African Descent. I know ol’ Ft. Benning and Columbus like the palm of my hand.
Where were you during the Albany Movement? Oh…. You shoulda been there. I am certain that your experiences through how your kin folk ‘helped’ colored folk would have helped us a lot when we were bombed in Albany, Leesburg, Newton and Sylvester.
I apologize for the restless nights your folk endured out of fear of the Klan. At least as they stood on the sidewalk watching my cousins and me get beat up by some of your neighbors they were able to push you out into the street to physically intervene. They did do that didn’t they? Oh …. Well, I rear where you were one of the first to integrate the all-colored school to prove your parents point.
Do you that your fathers ‘black’ friend was unable to get FHA benefits? Knowing about those knives and stuff were of benefit but did you know that colored military typically carried knives to protect themselves from folk who looked like your father? Historically, violence on Black folk was committed by White folk. It’s a fact but is it ‘racist?’ It is ‘racial.’ I had seven uncles and three aunts who served in three different ‘encounters. My father was Regular Army.
Eddie, a person without the power to exercise a threat cannot be a racist because he or she will be eliminated. A person who can, by merely stepping back on the sidewalk’ ore being quiet can support racism and benefit from the ‘first hired,’ affirmative action, preferential treatment fostered by systemic racism and bigotry.
It is unlikely that I, through sharing my many experiences on the receiving end, will convince you of your errors. For that matter, you will never convince me that our discomforts were comparable. Let the next generations resolve this continuing story.
Lock and load.
jmitchell

Another example demonstrating why the major media cannot be trusted to report accurately or to know their collective asses from a hole in the ground when it comes to guns.
A loaded 12 gauge shotgun, along with two magazines containing a combined 140 rounds of 12 gauge ammunition, in the glove compartment of a Honda Civic?!?!?


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CONNECTICUT_SCHOOL_SHOOTING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-28-09-57-19

Mar 28, 10:31 AM EDT

ARSENAL OF WEAPONS FOUND IN NEWTOWN GUNMAN'S HOME

BY JOHN CHRISTOFFERSEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

………
A loaded 12-gauge shotgun was found in the glove compartment of the Honda Civic Lanza drove to the school with two magazines containing 70 rounds of Winchester 12-gauge shotgun rounds..
………

happy jack wrote:

[b]Another example demonstrating why the major media cannot be trusted to report accurately or to know their collective asses from a hole in the ground when it comes to guns.
A loaded 12 gauge shotgun, along with two magazines containing a combined 140 rounds of 12 gauge ammunition, in the glove compartment of a Honda Civic?!?!?


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CONNECTICUT_SCHOOL_SHOOTING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-28-09-57-19

Mar 28, 10:31 AM EDT

ARSENAL OF WEAPONS FOUND IN NEWTOWN GUNMAN'S HOME

BY JOHN CHRISTOFFERSEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

………
A loaded 12-gauge shotgun was found in the glove compartment of the Honda Civic Lanza drove to the school with two magazines containing 70 rounds of Winchester 12-gauge shotgun rounds..
………

Making stuff up? Nowhere in the article does it say that.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CONNECTICUT_SCHOOL_SHOOTING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-28-09-57-19

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

[b]Another example demonstrating why the major media cannot be trusted to report accurately or to know their collective asses from a hole in the ground when it comes to guns.
A loaded 12 gauge shotgun, along with two magazines containing a combined 140 rounds of 12 gauge ammunition, in the glove compartment of a Honda Civic?!?!?


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CONNECTICUT_SCHOOL_SHOOTING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-28-09-57-19

Mar 28, 10:31 AM EDT

ARSENAL OF WEAPONS FOUND IN NEWTOWN GUNMAN'S HOME

BY JOHN CHRISTOFFERSEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

………
A loaded 12-gauge shotgun was found in the glove compartment of the Honda Civic Lanza drove to the school with two magazines containing 70 rounds of Winchester 12-gauge shotgun rounds..
………

Making stuff up? Nowhere in the article does it say that.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CONNECTICUT_SCHOOL_SHOOTING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-28-09-57-19

That article has been updated and corrected since I posted. What I posted above was cut and pasted directly from the original article.
Anyway ....



http://nation.time.com/2013/03/28/arsenal-of-weapons-found-in-newtown-gunmans-home/
A loaded 12-gauge shotgun was found in the glove compartment of the Honda Civic Lanza drove to the school with two magazines containing 70 rounds of Winchester 12-gauge shotgun rounds.
Read more: http://nation.time.com/2013/03/28/arsenal-of-weapons-found-in-newtown-gunmans-home/#ixzz2Or0w026g

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/28/newtown-search-warrants-released/2027639/
The warrants say that a loaded 12-gauge shotgun was found in the glove compartment of Lanza's Honda Civic.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/28/warrants-to-be-released-in-newtown-investigation/
A loaded 12-gauge shotgun was found in the glove compartment of the Honda Civic Lanza drove to the school with two magazines containing 70 rounds of Winchester 12-gauge shotgun rounds.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/28/warrants-to-be-released-in-newtown-investigation/#ixzz2Or1M0ukf

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=9044420
A loaded 12-gauge shotgun was found in the glove compartment of the Honda Civic Lanza drove to the school with two magazines containing 70 rounds of Winchester 12-gauge shotgun rounds.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sandy-hook-massacre-details-emerge-of-adam-lanzas-home-and-of-the-scene-at-the-school-8553624.html
Police later found a 12-gauge shotgun in the Honda's glove compartment with two magazines containing 70 rounds of Winchester 12-gauge shotgun rounds

http://www.dailypaul.com/279889/sandy-hook-shooter-had-12-gauge-shotgun-in-glove-compartment
Sandy Hook shooter had 12 gauge shotgun in glove compartment?

Submitted by dsmith83 on Thu, 03/28/2013 - 11:12
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/28/warrants-to-be-released...
Does anyone know what model shotgun this is?
I really want one for myself.





So, unlike you on the 'Transgender' thread, no, I am not "making stuff up".

happy jack wrote:

So, unlike you on the 'Transgender' thread, no, I am not "making stuff up".

Look up the word opinion,dumbass.