Seems to be official, but as no surprise if you do a news search you will have a hard time finding it in the mainstrean liberal news but you should be seeing it with the AWB bill. The Coroner reported that no one was killed with the rifle. Back to my prediction, that at a Federal level this info was tied up so they could try and ramrod an AWB through. How can a medical examiner get on TV and tell everyone that the deceased were all shot with a rifle and then a month later say otherwise. If he was wrong you think that the info would have come out faster than it had in light of the gun grabber frenzy
No Assault weapon used at Sandy Hook
- Thread starter schmalts
- Start date
jryoung
Well-known member
bigeasygator
New member
Link??
Wapiti Warrior
New member
bigeasygator
New member
I found one article from a website called conservativebyte.com with the headline "Coroner Confirms: No Assault Weapon Used in Sandy Hook Shooting" then proceeds to cite facts proven incorrect (such as the rifle being in the trunk when I've seen video of the shotgun being pulled from the trunk). I'll wait for something more reputable until I believe it.
Southwind
New member
I have not seen this officially reported yet. I did see the NY police commissioner say that only 2% of firearm crimes were committed with "assault weapons" and 60% were with hand guns in NYC. From the weekend reports in Chicago it seems the narrative is shifting focus towards hand guns and away from "assault weapons".
Makes me wonder if the Feinstein bill was a sacrifiscial lamb.
Makes me wonder if the Feinstein bill was a sacrifiscial lamb.
Topgun 30-06
Active member
It's all a bunch of hogwash cause by "reporters" again trying to get the scoop on each other and screwing up a number of times in all the hoopla that was ongoing! The coroner came on live TV as soon as a number of the dead had been autopsied a day or two after it happened and stated the rifle had been used. The closeup of the video shown on TV definitely showed a cop shucking shells from a shotgun they took out of the trunk of Lanza's car and not an AR type rifle.
I retract my first post. There is still so much conflicts of info. Coroner states rifle not use but state police say otherwise. When has there been so much contradictory info? Why is that the case in this event. Makes a person wonder
Could be right. What was the deal with the guy running in the woods being chased by cops that the news chopper filmed? Hunter? Homeless guy?
Wapiti Warrior
New member
One guy was reported as a father trying to find his child, since the school was in lock down. The other report of the guy in the woods was a man just walking by when the shit hit the fan. At least that is what I read on the snopes.com
John
John
Topgun 30-06
Active member
"Coroner states rifle not use but state police say otherwise."
Where did you see him say that? Being retired and not much to do this time of the year up here, I was here at the house with the TV on and saw all the live feed interviews, including the initail one where the coroner said the .223 was the weapon that killed all of them. Initial reports of how many guns, what guns, etc., were all screwed up just because of reporters wanting to get a "story" out first. It happens every time something big occurs and there are a bunch of details involved that get all gobbled up and spit out wrong over the air, all for the sake of being the "first to break the news" whether it's accurate or not!
Where did you see him say that? Being retired and not much to do this time of the year up here, I was here at the house with the TV on and saw all the live feed interviews, including the initail one where the coroner said the .223 was the weapon that killed all of them. Initial reports of how many guns, what guns, etc., were all screwed up just because of reporters wanting to get a "story" out first. It happens every time something big occurs and there are a bunch of details involved that get all gobbled up and spit out wrong over the air, all for the sake of being the "first to break the news" whether it's accurate or not!
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Absence of malice is a convenient exemptor...
npaden
Well-known member
Those numbers match up very closely with the FBI Crime statistics.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc...s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8
In 2011 323 people (2.5%) were murdered with rifles. That includes ALL rifles, not just AR-15 style rifles so the actual is lower. Almost 10 times more people were killed with blunt objects, knifes and fists, etc. as were killed with rifles.
Last edited:
nidahunter
Well-known member
I saw an interview with this coroner, and he is either really bad at trying to cover stuff up or is just plain really stupid. He couldnt keep his stories straight and dodged around certain questions. You hate to think the worst, but no one involved seems willing to put the whole truth out there.
Zach
Well-known member
Will we ever really find out the truth about weapons used?
sweetnectar
New member
Doesn't make a hill of beans to me if an AR or BB gun was used. The idiot using the gun is the one who did the killing, not the gun.
It was Professor Plum, in the library with the candlestick. Not the candlestick in the library with Professor Plum. People need to stop blaming inanimate objects and put accountability were it belongs.
However, it would be fun to throw it in the face of those trying to ban assault weapons if no AR was involved.
It was Professor Plum, in the library with the candlestick. Not the candlestick in the library with Professor Plum. People need to stop blaming inanimate objects and put accountability were it belongs.
However, it would be fun to throw it in the face of those trying to ban assault weapons if no AR was involved.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Only Hillary gets to use the 'what difference does it make' rationale.
dustinf
Active member
Well said.
