PROOF the Bushmaster WAS in the TRUNK of Lanza's car!!!

Originally posted by 00nunya00

Originally posted by XTexan

Domo, when did the police say it was a shotgun? Link? If you got a good source then its case closed

LOL, yes, like it's case closed on every other piece of conflicting info we get from the police.

Just saying, if it's been explained it's pretty much a dead end. Conflicting reports early on in a tragedy are notoriously bad.

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by XTexan

 

How can you decide what caliber it is based on the----as my dear friend put it----"grainy" video, but we cannot match it with the weapon we know was registered to her? This makes no sense.

I can't 100% tell you what caliber it is, but it looks much bigger than it should in relation to his hands, and the gun. The magazine also beefier than a .223/5.56 should

Originally posted by garbageface
reply to post by Nevertheless

 

Because people are using this issue to push an assault weapons ban.

I think most people are using common sense and saying that there is no place for such powerful weaponry in hunting, in sport, in self defence or general use. THAT is what people want banned.

There are numerous defences people use for having weapons from defence to hunting, but many of these ridiculous weapons are NOT suitable for anything other than mass murder.

Originally posted by sputniksteve
Im going to go back and be so bold to say there is no way that gun is an AR. There does appear to be a hi-cap magazine in the trunk but it is already there before the weapon is cycled. What is ejected appears to be a shotgun shell, and that most definitely looks like a shotgun with a pistol grip.

AR's have charging handles that are on the back of the rifle, parallel with the barrel and stock. When you eject something out of an AR, you don't pull back a bar on the side of the chamber, you pull back a Y kinda shaped metal piece like I said, it is a completely different set of motions.

This is not a Bushmaster AR.

edit on 12/19/2012 by sputniksteve because: (no reason given)

Agreed. The weapon in the video is charged from the right side the distance the bolt is pulled back, size of the receiver, and the type of buttstock all suggest that it is a shotgun, not an AR-15.

reply to post by 00nunya00


Here is a video of the officers looking in the trunk of Lanza's car in Sandy Hook. I just don't know what to think. But I believe something is very wrong with the ms story.

Police Find Long Gun In Trunk Of Car In Sandy Hook Parking Lot: Newtown Connecticut School Shooting
HistoricalRecordsVLTHistoricalRecordsVLT·432 videos
www.youtube.com...

reply to post by XTexan


But my point is, we had reports "from authorities" that Nancy Lanza was a teacher found dead at the school, and we know that's not true. If this LE report of it being a shotgun is anything less recent than the last 2 days or so, we can't count on it being true. And certainly, she didn't have any reported shotguns registered to her that fit the description of this weapon, so we would also have to find reports of another shotgun registered to her---or at least that she had unregistered weapons. THEN it would be case closed.

Want to bet that by tomorrow evening they'll have an MSM report of her having illegally unregistered assault weapons?

Originally posted by detachedindividual

Originally posted by garbageface
reply to post by Nevertheless

 

Because people are using this issue to push an assault weapons ban.

I think most people are using common sense and saying that there is no place for such powerful weaponry in hunting, in sport, in self defence or general use. THAT is what people want banned.

There are numerous defences people use for having weapons from defence to hunting, but many of these ridiculous weapons are NOT suitable for anything other than mass murder.

So your saying all rifles .223/5.56 and up should be banned?

PLEASE let's keep the discussion on the gun found in the trunk, and not delve into YET ANOTHER gun control debate. Please?

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by XTexan

 

Want to bet that by tomorrow evening they'll have an MSM report of her having illegally unregistered assault weapons?

edit on 19-12-2012 by 00nunya00 because: (no reason given)

Honestly? I almost expect it, it would do nothing but help them push their agenda

Originally posted by XTexan

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by XTexan

 

Want to bet that by tomorrow evening they'll have an MSM report of her having illegally unregistered assault weapons?

edit on 19-12-2012 by 00nunya00 because: (no reason given)

Honestly? I almost expect it, it would do nothing but help them push their agenda

I'll take it as validation if they do. There would have been plenty of time by now to report that she had unregistered weapons, if they do it now, it's obvious as all get-out.

I'm not from CT, but a quick check of the gun laws has brought up some interesting facts...

1. The AR-15 is classed as an Assault Weapon in Connecticut.

2. The Saiga is not mentioned specifically in the legislation, but it's an AK platform and semi-auto AKs are classed as an Assault Weapon in Connecticut.

www.cga.ct.gov... - read it.

Possession of an Assault Weapon is a Class D Felony
Possession of an Assault Weapon - if lawful possession prior to 1993 can be proved - is a Class A Misdemeanor

The family moved from NH to CT in 1998.

Nancy Lanza wasn't a cop and wasn't military and since she became a survivalist after her divorce in 2008, it's unlikely the weapons were legally obtained.

From the link above -

[QUOTE]Certificates of Possession

The act allowed anyone who lawfully possessed an assault weapon before October 1, 1993 to apply by July 1, 1994 to DPS for a certificate of possession. A certificate of possession allowed the owner of an assault weapon to possess it:

1. at (a) his or her residence, business, or property or (b) another person's property with permission;

2. at certain target ranges or licensed shooting clubs;

3. while attending certain types of firearms exhibitions, displays, or educational projects; or

4. while transporting it, in accordance with the act, between any of the places mentioned above or to a licensed dealer for servicing or repair.

When an assault weapon is being transported between these locations, the act prohibited (1) carrying it loaded and concealed from view or (2) knowingly carrying it in a vehicle when it was (a) loaded or (b) unloaded unless it was in the vehicle's trunk or a container inaccessible to the vehicle's occupants. The act punished violations with up to three years in prison, up to a $500 fine, or both.

Beginning January 1, 1994, the act prohibited anyone with a certificate from selling an assault weapon to anyone in the state except a licensed firearm dealer or otherwise transferring it except by bequest or intestate succession or to DPS or a police department. The act required an assault weapon owner who sells or transfers the weapon to a licensed gun dealer to execute a certificate of transfer at the time of sale or transfer and send it to DPS.

Exceptions

The act included a number of exceptions to the ban on possession and transfer of assault weapons. It allowed:

1. someone to transfer by bequest or intestate succession an assault weapon for which a certificate had been issued;

2. anyone who inherited an assault weapon for which a certificate had been issued or an estate executor or administrator to possess and dispose of the assault weapon as specified in the act;

3. the Department of Correction (DOC), DPS, police departments, and the military forces to purchase assault weapons for official use and their employees or members to possess the weapons; and

4. licensed gun dealers to (a) accept assault weapons for servicing from anyone with a certificate for the weapon; (b) transfer assault weapons for servicing under certain circumstances; and (c) transport lawfully possessed weapons between dealers or out-of-state, display them at gun shows licensed by a state or local government entity, or sell them to out-of-state residents.

The act also:

1. allowed an individual to arrange to relinquish an assault weapon to a police department or DPS;

2. allowed temporary transfer or possession of an assault weapon for which a certificate had been issued for certain out-of-state events; and

3. required anyone who moved into the state in lawful possession of an assault weapon to sell it to a licensed gun dealer, make it permanently inoperable, or take it out of state.[/QUOTE]

The last point, #3 above is the most interesting to me.

So it looks like some of the weapons used in the massacre may have been obtained illegally. But that's really beside the point at this time...

My point is that Connecticut already had heavy restriction of assault weapons - in effect an Assault Weapon Ban - yet it did not stop this tragedy. Adam Lanza was not only a detached nutjob, he fell through the mental health cracks. Tightening up those cracks would have done far more to stop the next deranged gunman than a crackdown on firearms in a state which already has an assault weapons ban.

Originally posted by nottelling

Nancy Lanza wasn't a cop and wasn't military and since she became a survivalist after her divorce in 2008, it's unlikely the weapons were legally obtained.

Can you link me a credible source for this? I've only seen it in the DailyFail, nowhere else credible. I wouldn't doubt it, with her gun collection, but I just haven't gotten the good source on that piece yet.

Stop!...all of you just stop! Do you not see what is happening? "They" are succeeding in their missions...they are...once again...dividing us. Everyone mourns the slaughter of the innocents....but these bastards are using it as a tool...they are intentionally turning this into a battle of left and right and I hate them for that.

What happened is a tragedy beyond words....and as long as we "the sheep" fight amongst ourselves....we are not doing justice to the children. You have to be blind or insane to not see how certain people are manipulating this tragedy...it is right in your face. I can only pray that both sides open their eyes and lay down their arms...refuse to participate in this madness....and that is what it is...madness.

No one is heartless and callous. I see both sides bickering and it breaks my heart because you are doing exactly what they have anticipated you would do.

Do some of you not see just how the timing of this is remarkably convenient for the administration? Do some of you...in your zealousness to preserve the second amendment...not see how horrible this was?

I admit....I have tossed out some really off the wall "theories" in an effort to wrap my brain around the incomprehensible...I have even entertained the thought that it was staged...that something this horrible could not "really" happen...but I am drawn back to a schoolhouse in Amish country a few years ago....yeah...it is real.

There are sick people out there...we need to deal with that...but we cannot let "them" dictate how this unfolds....this is our land...that is my neighbor...I refuse to let these disconnected @ssholes in gov tell me how I am supposed to react. I feel the pain...I see it...we are bigger and better than this...please...try to think outside the box and do not let the pricks in power manipulate us so easily....make it more difficult for them.

this thing reeks of Port Arthur.

Guns planted in the boot scenario, witnesses saying two shooters.

You could probably write this massacre with other massacre pieces, where these massacres have succeeded to take guns away from citizens.

reply to post by Jeremiah65


I agree. It's my opinion that this event was a set up. They have really upped the ante on this one - 20 innocent little children murdered with a military-caliber weapon known for its capacity to tumble and cause disfiguring wounds - if the shootee survives. BTW: That's going to be one of the primary arguments the anti-gunners use later after everyone has finally agreed that 30 round mags, telescoping buttstocks, pistol grips and picatinny rails are evil.

Back to the set up. It's actually really close to the Australian Port Arthur massacre. Lone gunman suspected of being mentally disabled. Most of the damage doen with an AR rifle and a shotgun is found in the trunk of his vehicle - in Lanza's case it was probably a Saiga 12, in Martin Bryant's (Australian gunman) case it was a USAS 12.

Both events had an almost uncanny amount of kills versus wounded. Note for example that the average wartime firefight leads to more wounded than killed - and that's when the triggers are squeezed by trained soldiers.

Both events were so horrible that they immediately led to major legislative changes - hasn't happened in the US yet, but it will - and soon.

It's all too convenient...

Note the dates on the articles below:

www.nationalreview.com...
articles.chicagotribune.com... illegal-gun
edition.cnn.com...
washingtonexaminer.com...

I'm not saying that Obama is behind this, I think it's an international effort, but how convenient that news reports that he plans on addressing gun control during his second term are followed up by the most horriffic gun massacre in US history just days later?

Makesyawonder, huh?

Originally posted by Feltrick
reply to post by 00nunya00

 

That's not an Enfield, that's a Garand! An Enfield is bolt action!

To open the bolt on an AR, you pull from the back, not the side.

edit on 19-12-2012 by Feltrick because: (no reason given)

Sorry, Trick.. look at the right side (upper) view and the bolt hangin' out.
.303 Lee Enfield.. and in mighty nice shape too.
I'm also willing to bet if the Henry's a .30-30 rotary bolt, the Enfield's
got the biggest impact energy of the whole bunch. Be a real shame
if they saw that one up. Learned after a .22 on a Springfield '03, the
shorter American cousin of hers. ps doesn't make me dangerous,
it means I'm trained.

reply to post by sputniksteve


You're right,
It's a Saiga shotgun!
The clincher is that 0:01 second in you see the clip and it's straight, not curved like AR mags.
How many cops do you know would fumble around like to discharge an AR?
He seemed unfamiliar with it and the round is far too large to be .223

Good work Sputniksteve.

Originally posted by sputniksteve
Im going to go back and be so bold to say there is no way that gun is an AR. There does appear to be a hi-cap magazine in the trunk but it is already there before the weapon is cycled. What is ejected appears to be a shotgun shell, and that most definitely looks like a shotgun with a pistol grip.

AR's have charging handles that are on the back of the rifle, parallel with the barrel and stock. When you eject something out of an AR, you don't pull back a bar on the side of the chamber, you pull back a Y kinda shaped metal piece like I said, it is a completely different set of motions.

This is not a Bushmaster AR.

edit on 12/19/2012 by sputniksteve because: (no reason given)

I agree with you... after watching the video the cop unloads the gun on the side like you would with a semi-auto shotgun, much like the Saiga shotgun. It takes a magazine and to the common person that isn't a gun nut like me, it does look like an assault rifle.

Originally posted by derfreebie

Originally posted by Feltrick
reply to post by 00nunya00

 

That's not an Enfield, that's a Garand! An Enfield is bolt action!

To open the bolt on an AR, you pull from the back, not the side.

edit on 19-12-2012 by Feltrick because: (no reason given)

Sorry, Trick.. look at the right side (upper) view and the bolt hangin' out.
.303 Lee Enfield.. and in mighty nice shape too.
I'm also willing to bet if the Henry's a .30-30 rotary bolt, the Enfield's
got the biggest impact energy of the whole bunch. Be a real shame
if they saw that one up. Learned after a .22 on a Springfield '03, the
shorter American cousin of hers. ps doesn't make me dangerous,
it means I'm trained.

It's an Enfield designed M1917 .30/06 - Saw extensive use by US forces in WWI alongside the Springfield '03 and most were exported to the UK during WWII for use by the British Home Guard and Second Line troops after the Dunkirk disaster decimated Britain's war stores. very common weapon in its day, and much maligned in the US since it's a foreign-designed firearm - being a lightly modified and rechambered version of the British Pattern 13 (or Rifle, No. 3).

It's not .303 nor is it a Lee Enfield, but you're right about the weapon firing the most powerful round out of the bunch of them.

Similarly, I learned on a .30/06 Remington manufactured "Enfield" M1917 and a .303 Lithgow manufactured Lee Enfield No. 1 Mk III after graduating from a humble Russian made Baikal bolt-action .22.