Photo: Sandy Hook shooter as a toddler.

reply to post by NickDC202


Well I imagine they are coming out because the official report on the case just came out a few months back. I posted it on the first page of this thread.

This is not a red flag. I have a picture of my 3 year old shooting his first shotgun with his uncle as well as sighting a 50 cal rifle that was used for hunting that outing. If, and I say IF something ever happened would it be used in the same fashion when it was realy about hom emulating the older kids.


I would say look into who she was dating when she was killed and what affect that was having on AL. Just a thought because if you do not hear about it than there is a story there in most cases.

ExoPatriotico
reply to post by Logarock

 

Did you see the grenade in the boy's lap?

I think many here don't realize that this FAKED image was a result of an official release by the ---> Connecticut State Police release photoshopped baby picture of Adam Lanza chewing pistol

I see that the cover shot from the Daily News is even more complete regarding its CROPPING. I am looking now for the original UN-CROPPED version of this photo so as to ID all of the military type armaments displayed therein.

edit on 23-1-2014 by ExoPatriotico because: pic add

See.. I find this ridiculous and rampant since the digital age.
Why the hell would they need to photoshop a photo that they could easily stage and take for real with less effort and the same amount of people knowing of the hoax?

The photo is obviously a real photo.
As to whether or not it is actually Adam Lanza, I can't say.

reply to post by matafuchs


That is a little different. That doesn't say much about you personally. If this is Adam Lanza it does say something about his family and in retrospect that might be worth looking into.

Im not even saying it means anything nefarious regarding the parents, but it might mean something..
You are seeing an extreme amount of weapons, heavy fire power, grenade launchers, and hopefully a decomissioned grenade in the lap of a toddler who is chewing on a handgun.

That is a huge leap from a picture of a kid shooting a shotgun.

reply to post by ExoPatriotico


The part about the bodies in the bathroom may be true.

All the children were shot in two classrooms (8 and 10) one classroom had 15 dead kids. If those kids were in a bathroom that was inside the classroom (which isn't unusual in elementary and kindergarten) then it is possible.

GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Logarock

 

The thread isn't a troll, and should not be dumped in the hoax bin BECAUSE if you follow the links you will see, as far as the reality presented int he MSM is concerned, this is real. In order for it to be a hoax i would have had to have taken the picture and made up a story for it.

People do store ammo like that and people do keep weapons like that. I don't understand that part of your post.

Obviously the photo is staged in the sense that adults put that on the child for a photo.

We actually don't know how many guns Nancy Lanza owned. We know about the guns that were taken into evidence.
If she didn't own this then we have questions.

Why did she have the photo? Is it Adam? Did she own these weapons? When she was married did she and her husband own these weapons?

edit on 23-1-2014 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

One thing the photo suggests is that the person in possession of these weapons had a special permit for some of them or held them illegally i.e. the machinegun ammo belt suggests.... a machine gun and frag grenade. The grenade was probably fake as you cant really get any sort of permit for those.

There is no proof, no illegal weapons confiscated and the persons in question had no special permits ever.

By the way this NY Daily News is junk. That's the real reason this thread should get hoaxed out. lol

reply to post by Logarock


No.. again if you follow the thread there are other credible sites. That is why I posted multiple links. You should read what a hoax thread is, or get acquainted with soorcha.

Also the New York Daily news isn't like the national inquired. It is a legit tabloid. They do rush to print and sometimes falter for sensation, but it is one of the biggest newspapers in the US. It doesnt make stories up.

So after searching yourself (which I presume you did before crying hoax) and discovering it is official that this is claimed to come from the shooters house, do you have any actual thoughts?

GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Logarock

 

No.. again if you follow the thread there are other credible sites. That is why I posted multiple links. You should read what a hoax thread is, or get acquainted with soorcha.

Also the New York Daily news isn't like the national inquired. It is a legit tabloid. They do rush to print and sometimes falter for sensation, but it is one of the biggest newspapers in the US. It doesnt make stories up.

So after searching yourself (which I presume you did before crying hoax) and discovering it is official that this is claimed to come from the shooters house, do you have any actual thoughts?

I need to see this carried a bit better than it has been by theses sources. Need to see names of detectives. Need to see it more in-depth concerning the whole body of martial said to have been released by the authorities. Need to hear what the father has to say about that particular photo. Need to see a well constructed report that doesn't sensationalize the story like the Dailey did with the bold statement about his parents thinking this was the right way to raise a kid or a killer without better links to the photo being part of the official findings.

For example, I need to see more than a photo of an automatic weapon and some lose rounds. I want to see photos of ejected rounds in a wide panorama of the room.

From reports released none of the weapons in the photo were recovered no filing of permits has been demonstrated. Have to demonstrate a better connection.

Now I ask you, do you have anything better than these reports? Do you have any actual evidence that this is Adam?

reply to post by Logarock


Nope. It doesn't suggest that. I can get all of those things at my local army navy store.
They don't work, but they look just as you seen in the picture.

reply to post by Logarock


You don't need to see those to see that the thread isn't a hoax. All you have to see is that the thread presents the information from the news sites correctly and it isn't an intentional deception on my part.

You can say it's a hoax until it's proven by the MSM, but then you would be saying that about every aspect of the shooting and every other news story they have done.

Nothing in the media suggests these images were taken in their home, but also there were likely more weapons in the house - the only ones taken were the ones used in the crimes. However I doubt this is from the same house and if it is AL it's when his parents were together and suggests both parents were extreme gun enthusiasts which wouldn't falsify the news story, but is part of the discussion i'm trying to create.

Gun Rights for the Mentally Ill. Lawmakers say the legislation is necessary so as not to leave our nation’s mentally ill defenseless against a better-equipped, well-armed imaginary enemy.

This is just MY OWN OPINION.

Im a "pro gun" person. Ive been around guns all my life, hunt, own guns, etc. My husband is a combat vet, been around guns his whole life, has guns, etc. My parents and his parents... same.. "pro gun". To us.. a gun is a tool and a weapon. You simply dont allow kids to play with or use as photo ops... unless its a competition or memory of kid shooting with grandpa or hunting, etc. Never have we felt the need to dress our kids up in camo with weapons for a pic nor have we ever been dressed up and used as a prop for gun pics. We werent allowed to chew on guns and dont allow our kids to. This is a sick photo IMO. A person who has an infantile mind. An irresponsible person. Makes one wonder what this child will be taught about a tool and weapon with these kinds of idiots for parents.

May be or may not be Lanza.. but there is still a baby in a photo taken by idiots.

GalaxyEyes
That's a bad photoshop job. Look at the shadow of the toddler on the left how it just magically ignores the physical laws of 3D space.

Your brain magically ignores the laws of common sense.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Is that a picture of the government agent the police caught running through the woods?

Because until I see a video of skinny Adam Lanza dragging all that gear into the school, I'm not buying a single word of this corrupt government's story.

reply to post by therealguyfawkes


They explain the guys in the woods in the official report if you read it (fairly long read, but if you'll take my word for it i've read it) . Those guys were my main question. The answer isn't a great one and still a bit fishy sounding, but they addressed it. There were a few inconsistencies to me, but the guy carrying the ammo wasnt one. .223 is a light round and even a relatively weak person could carry 500 rounds easy. The report actually answers this too and says the combined weight of guns and ammo was 39 lbs. and that sounds about right and completely doable to me.

reply to post by rupertg


There are laws against the mentally ill having guns. But they get them sometimes and nothing would change that, not even a ban. Just as nothing changes drug users from getting illegal substances (flown from the middleast, mexico, and south america - where there's a will there's a way).

This incident was a catastrophic failure on the part of his mother, father, and doctors. Nancy was apparently getting Adam or herself a gun for Christmas. I struggle tobsee how she could be so oblivious.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


39 lbs is almost 1/3 of Lanza's bodyweight....

Go watch Sofia Smallstorm's Unraveling Sandy Hook, and near the beginning you'll see a former special ops soldier say that he's 200lbs and that the purported load Lanza was carrying would've been at or near his own personal carrying limits, and WAY beyond the limits of a 120lb untrained kid.

reply to post by therealguyfawkes


But he has no idea what the "purported load" actually was. It was speculation by people like us. It appears that he likely had less than 500 .223 on him.

You deflected saying "thats almost a third of his weight." First that isn't almost a third of his weight. It's like a fourth and thats nothing.

The reality is that 39 lbs isn't much at all for a grown man to carry. Thats ammo and guns. The gun is on a sling making it easier. The ammo was carried on his body and in pockets.

Im not a debunked, but I am honest. You and I both know its not unrealistic. Its not even close to unrealistic. It wouldn't have been hard for him. A skinny teen girl with no weight training could carry it.

I still think there are inconsistencies, but its time for people to concede a few things. This is one of them.

It wouldn't have been hard for him to carry what he had AND it appears he may have left the shotgun and ammo to lighten his load.

reply to post by therealguyfawkes


Also.. i'm 142 lbs and I could carry the load he carried. No problem. I cant inagine a real soldier would actually admit to such a thing with out an agenda.