you like apples obama? .... well, how do you like these apples? ....

in a belated acknowledgment by nbc on the today show today, it is apparently confirmed that an ar-15 rifle was not used by adam lanza in the shooting of the connecticut school children.  such a rifle was found in the trunk of his car, but it was apparently not used in the shooting.

in addition, it is confirmed that lanza tried to buy an ar-15 rifle some days before the shooting, but was denied the purchase by a connecticut gun dealer.  (wanna bet, this is not emphasized very much?  do ya?)  pete williams said it was because connecticut has a "... long waiting period ... ", but this suggestion is pure idiocy.  the waiting period would not have been the grounds for the vendor to have refused tender of the weapon on an attempted purchase, ... , it simply would have delayed delivery had the purchase been completed.  there must have been another ground for denying purchase, and i suspect the state of connecticut denied delivery on the grounds that lanza had been adjudicated dangerous because of mental defect.

in short, the law apparently worked to deny him legal access to weapons.  but, it could not deny him total access, to same.

we'll see, if someone is interested enough in the facts to find out why he was denied purchase.

hat tip, don.  http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495.

it further turns out, according to pete williams the reporter in the above clip, that connecticut police officials are saying that lanza had as many as four pistols on him, though it is not said whether all four were recovered at the place his body was recovered.

my oh my, what a mess.

what happened to all of the spent brass shell casings from the ar-15 rifle which were supposed to have littered the school, in horrible, ghastly profusion, an indictment against multi-round magazines?

and, what about a medical examiner's office that cannot tell the difference between the wounding effect of a rifle caliber as opposed to a semi automatic pistol round?  i will just say, that there is a great deal of difference in the wounding inflicted by a high velocity rifle round and a pistol round, ... , and, such should have been readily apparent to experienced forensic pathologists. 

what a confusing situation.   when will the next "change," the next "clarification" in facts emerge, to be massaged more carefully towards obama's gun confiscation agenda?

john jay @ 12.31.2012

p.s.  anyone have the notion that the media and the politicians will lie about anything to advance their agendas?  anyone?

Comments

[Rod]

JJ -
Bravo! Two Huahs and a High Five for this note. The question we all should be demanding to be answered by the MSM and our elected officials is why did they fail to get their facts straight before launching into the current attacks of our Constitution?

[john jay]

rod:

well, indeed, why didn't they get their facts straight before the launched the attacks upon our constitution?

john

p.s. the obvious answer is because they are leftist assholes intent on subverting our rights, and any excuse will do. but, in the interest of polite discourse, what little time remains for it, it is well & good that the question be framed as you suggest.

[Grog]

Rod, the media and elected officials have had collusion for over 30 years, and it's easy for some people to villify an inanimate object than to admit the individual is at fault.

The long term goals of certain individuals in DC haven't changed, but these goals are well known, be patient, change isn't only for them to implement, and change is a constant in life.

[sDee]

Too much is known "too soon" - fact or not. All that is certain is that reason and truth will not be pursed by any "media".

Thank you for some analytics.

There was a day the press would have waited for forensic reports before saying anything, let alone the caliber of recovered bullets or casings. Your points about the AR not being used is just one example of how rapidly the original narrative, they call "news", adapts.

It reminded me of this video. The car appears to be the Honda Civic Lanza was supposed to driving. Does not look like an AR to me nor a very good method to unload it, if it was.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLrxSgkqJQc

[TheBigHenry]

Off topic: Why no upper-case use for greater clarity? I realize it's probably a stylistic choice, but does that really trump your readers' comfort?

[john jay]

big henry:

cuz.

it's sort of a little bug of mine. i think, quite to the contrary of the position you hold, that capitals simply detract from digesting the text rapidly and easily.

i don't see any function that they perform, at all. i think they are simply an artist contrivance of monks to make the page look pretty.

any portion of the text you could not understand because of the lack of caps?

john

[john jay]

sDee:

thank you very much for this film clip.

i have watched it, as best i could on my handy dandy little lap top.

i cannot tell you for sure what sort of weapon it is.

i can state unequivocally that it is not an ar-15 type rifle. when the person in the clip is seen to clear the chamber, and round or case is clearly seen to be ejected, he does so by grabbing an operating handle on the right side of the weapons receiver.

this is not where the operating handle is located on an ar-15 type rifle. on such a rifle, the operating handle is located at the upper rear of the top receiver, right next to the stock.

i cannot positively identify the arm. at first i thought it might be an ak-47/74 or some sort of similar variant, such as a cz-58, ... , but, upon watching the clip again and again, it just doesn't appear to me to look like an ak, or an ak variant.

for one thing, the barrel of the gun seems visible over some sort of conventional looking rifle stock. and, the receiver looks flat, not at all having the bumps & projections and levers of an ak.

to me, it appears closer to some sort of .22 long rifle semi auto. not a weapon to be trifled with, most certainly, but also not a weapon like an ar-15 or an ak-47.

now, i am accepting at face value that this film is what is purports to be, e.g., an officer at the scene of the school shooting in connecticut searching the trunk of the car lanza purportedly drove to the scene.

given the circumstances as they have developed in the news reporting of all of this, i am not totally certain that those assumptions are carved in stone.

we'll see.

but, it is as plain as the nose on my face that the weapon is not an ar-15. nor does it appear to me to be an ak-47 or an ak-74.

it appears to me to be a .22 long rifle chambered semi auto of some sort.

who knows?

john

[john jay]

sDee:

many thanks for the link.

i have posted on it, with a hat tip to you.

so many things i find out about, from you.

thank you, very much.

john

[TheBigHenry]

Thanx for your response, John. I support your supposition that the caps were originally introduced for artistic purposes. But, though it is redundant to the period at the end of a sentence to mark the beginning of the next, I think the cap is more noticeable, and helps the reader identify the "bite-size" chunks of text to be read.

For me, at least, it aids in "digesting" the flow of the text.

[Johnnie Von Bernhardi]

I think he did not complete the purchase because he did not want to wait. He then used the stolen rifle.