Connecticut school district on lockdown after shooting report at a Newtown elemen-#4

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
writerranger said:
As for the link about Doomsday Prepping not being MSM....how about NBC network affiliate WHDH? The video is at the link I provided.....The following is the transcript - the video with her sister from WHDH is online - again, at this link: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/12/wow_waiting_for_the_apocalypse.php



WHDH 7 in New Hampshire, the local NBC affiliate, interviewed Lanza’s former sister-in-law, Marsha …

“Last time we visited with her in person we talked about prepping and you know, are you ready for what can happen down the line when the economy collapses,” said the gunman’s aunt, Marsha Lanza.

The reporter asked, “Survivalist kind of thing?”

“Yea,” said Marsha Lanza.

Nancy’s guns were supposed to be for self defense. Marsha Lanza called her nephew a special needs child. So far, no motive has been released.

“Just pray for peace,” said Marsha Lanza. “Do I think gun laws need to be changed? No. It’s the person that does the killing, not the gun.”
Click to expand...

And if she was? Does that make her dangerous or crazy.

BTW, isn't Marsha her ex sister-in-law?
 
johunt said:
In your opinion, who should be confined? At what point do we make that call? Just an honest question.
Click to expand...

I don't have an answer to that question. I think people who pose a threat of violence need to be in some kind of protective custody -- a hospital or residential treatment center. But we don't really have infaliable ways of determining who poses this kind of threat in the short term or the long term. And we don't know, when such people are treated, whether the threat really goes away.

I think the systems we have had in the past where someone could be locked up for a lifetime with no recourse were far worse than what we have now. But what we have now is seriously flawed, too.

There was a recent case in Minnesota http://www.startribune.com/local/125693298.html?refer=yhttp:// of a teen who killed two convenience store clerks. His parents had spent years trying to get help for him, but they couldn't jump through all the proper hoops because the system is so fragmented.

Of course we don't know whether the CT shooter's parents ever got any help for him, or indeed whether they considered him dangerous. He may never have been considered a threat to anyone at all. But even in cases where we have very good evidence that someone is dangerous, it can be impossible to remove them from society long enough to deal with the threat.
 
toscaxyz said:
That is true in theory but very hard to implement in practice. Who determines who is dangerous enough to be confined involuntarily? And how do we determine when a person who has been confined is no longer a threat? (We can't really even do that effectively with criminals who are not mentally ill.) What if a person has been treated effectively? Can they be released?

The old system of mental hospitals had many abuses, but the current system does, too. The current abuses are mostly those of neglect, but they also put the public at risk because it is so hard to confine someone who has not already committed a crime. But if we make it easier, we risk confining people who do not need to be confined, without due process.
Click to expand...

Wherever do you get the idea that confining someone because of psychiatric issues is a conflict of their rights of due process? Most states do have some form of a Baker's Act. The problem isn't in short-term, it is the long term that requires addressing.

Because something is "hard to do in practice" doesn't mean it shouldn't be done at all. As far as I know, there is not now a system of public mental hospitals that provide long-term resources to the families with the mentally ill living in their household.

I work in a maximum security prison for young men convicted of adult crimes such as murder. Some prisoners I have yet to meet because they are segregated from other prisoners because of safety issues either for themselves or others. The most violent prisoners in seg. are not the ones in for murder. That said, they ALL have access to mental health practioners on a daily or hourly basis if need be. I have no doubt if some of them had enjoyed access to such resources earlier in their lives, they would never commit such crimes.

JMO
 
The President is still meeting with the families, thus a delay.
 
Trident said:
And if she was? Does that make her dangerous or crazy.

BTW, isn't Marsha her ex sister-in-law?
Click to expand...

IMO; stockpiling weapons because of 12/21/2012 does make you "off". You're planning on fighting off....Who? What? It's ridiculous.
 
Trident said:
And if she was? Does that make her dangerous or crazy.
Click to expand...

No, no, not at all. I wrote that in context of several posters speculating where all the ammunition came from. Just putting together pieces of a puzzle. I meant nothing toward NL if it is true - it would only explain the access Adam may have had to ammo. And remember, this might not even be true!
 
OT but I just love your avatar-picture-thingy!! :D



waitin'4thewrld2chg said:
If anyone would like to light a virtual candle during the upcoming memorial service or at any other time, I have opened a group room at gratefulness.org, a very large site used by persons world-wide.

The group names can contain up to four letters/numbers, so I chose a combination/order (CTSH) that has not yet been used: CT for Connecticut and SH for Sandy Hook.

The candle stays lit for 48 hours and you can light more than one candle at a time.


http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/candles.cfm?l=eng&gi=ctsh
Click to expand...
 
Adam Lantz was an extremely troubled young man. From what I have heard/read via media, he had troubles starting very young and appears may have progressed as he got older. As far a premeditated, he could have "planned" this within a day. I think some event, and perhaps one that would have been a non issue for a healthy young adult, sent him into a breakdown. If he did in fact have a mental disorder (I, in my opinion, believes he did), it would have taken absolutely anything to set him off. Especially if he was not taking (just part of my thoughts as I nor anyone knows real facts as of yet) medications possibly prescribed.

Having family members with mental illness, I am *very* much aware how difficult it is for the sufferer and family. And, the older they get, the more possibilities of violence toward themselves or others. Their minds absolutely do not function normally nor do they take in the simplest of conversations normally. Many times, they feel they are being attacked somehow. I know, some may not understand what I'm feebly trying to explain and I am NOT giving Adam Lantz a free pass. Just asking that be more open minded towards mental illness and the horrific ravages to others it can cause.

As far as Nancy Lantz goes: God bless this woman for trying her heart best for her son. Never, ever (I am positive!) would she have believed her youngest son would resort to mass murder.

Just my opinion, just say'in, 10-4 over and out. :eek:)
 
Trident said:
And if she was? Does that make her dangerous or crazy.

BTW, isn't Marsha her ex sister-in-law?
Click to expand...

She is her ex sister in law but I do not think it was a bad divorce because the ex husband gave her much higher money then he had to according to his lawyer,so I would think they remained friends.While it might not mean she was dangerous or crazy to be a survivalist to her son who had problems it might have been taken to an extreme in his state of mind.
 
writerranger said:
Yes, there was definitely someone cuffed and on the ground at the school. One of the boys interviewed mentioned seeing him in handcuffs as they left for the fire department. I've wondered what that was about myself.
Click to expand...

A member theorized yesterday that he was probably someone in the wrong place at the wrong time and then released after it was determined he was not involved in the attack. This makes the most sense to me as we haven't heard anything mentioned about him since Friday.
 
Our leader... is Human. Children were murdered for Cripes sake!
 
MyBelle said:
Wherever do you get the idea that confining someone because of psychiatric issues is a conflict of their rights of due process? Most states do have some form of a Baker's Act. The problem isn't in short-term, it is the long term that requires addressing.

Because something is "hard to do in practice" doesn't mean it shouldn't be done at all. As far as I know, there is not now a system of public mental hospitals that provide long-term resources to the families with the mentally ill living in their household.

I work in a maximum security prison for young men convicted of adult crimes such as murder. Some prisoners I have yet to meet because they are segregated from other prisoners because of safety issues either for themselves or others. The most violent prisoners in seg. are not the ones in for murder. That said, they ALL have access to mental health practioners on a daily or hourly basis if need be. I have no doubt if some of them had enjoyed access to such resources earlier in their lives, they would never commit such crimes.

JMO
Click to expand...

My gf tried to take her son into ER a dozen times or more when her son was suicidal. Every single time they would get there the doctor would say- are you going to kill yourself or are you contemplating suicide? He would say "no" and that was the end of it.
Often nothing can be done until it is too late or they have done something illegal. I can only speak for CA- but it is very difficult to get someone committed involuntarily. If they are not doing anything actively that is a danger to others- then the thought police cannot do anything at all.
Involuntary commitment is a slippery slope.
As you say, the men you worked with were already incarcerated- presumably because they did something wrong. Prior to that- unless they actively seek it out or agree to be hospitalized it is nearly impossible to get done on a hunch or a fear- even if founded. The resources are there but the MI have to get onboard and the catch22 is that they are MI and don't always get it.

I truly don't know what the answer is because I would not want someone to be able to commit me on the word of another person only. KWIM?
 
aww CNN has disaster relief "comfort dogs" at the vigil!!!!
They look like golden retrievers ?
Everyone began to flock around the dogs and some parents saw their
children smiling again!!!!
 
gxm said:
A member theorized yesterday that he was probably someone in the wrong place at the wrong time and then released after it was determined he was not involved in the attack. This makes the most sense to me as we haven't heard anything mentioned about him since Friday.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware they took anybody into custody until I saw it mentioned here. I have to wonder if that person isn't still in custody. In one of the many media reports I heard today, one was repeating comments by someone in the school. It was something about seeing "two shadows" running past a window.

JMO
 
They think they're going to have to fight off hordes of people who haven't prepped and have no food and some preppers mention welfare recipients being the first to attack.
 
JBean said:
My gf tried to take her son into ER a dozen times or more when her son was suicidal. Every single time they would get there the doctor would say- are you going to kill yourself or are you contemplating suicide? He would say "no" and that was the end of it.
Often nothing can be done until it is too late or they have done something illegal. I can only speak for CA- but it is very difficult to get someone committed involuntarily. If they are not doing anything actively that is a danger to others- then the thought police cannot do anything at all.
Involuntary commitment is a slippery slope.
As you say, the men you worked with were already incarcerated- presumably because they did something wrong. Prior to that- unless they actively seek it out or agree to be hospitalized it is nearly impossible to get done on a hunch or a fear- even if founded.

I truly don't know what the answer is because I would not want someone to be able to commit me on the word of another person only. KWIM?
Click to expand...

Fact, JBean. If the person is of age, the family has absolutely no rights regarding the welfare of their child. And, again, another fact. Unless there is an issue that LE must be involved in regarding a loved one, nothing can be done to get them admitted to hospital for evaluations. ~Then~, the hope is if they are admitted, it will be for longer than the "normal" 10 days. It's awful what my family members have been through over the years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 212 more.
Total: 4,398 (members: 213, guests: 4,185)

Online statistics

Members online
213
Guests online
4,185
Total visitors
4,398
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,355
Messages
17,967,942
Members
228,754
Latest member
Annie151
Back
Top