A bit over a week ago, a guy named Adam Lanza snapped.\u00a0 He went full-blown batshit crazy, murdered his own mother, then stole her guns and used them to commit mass murder of innocents.\u00a0 He then killed himself.<\/p>\n
Ever since, the \u201cliberals\u201d and \u201cprogressives\u201d have been virtually falling over each other to be seen advocating more gun laws. \u00a0How dare Lanza’s mother have owned those \u201cevil\u201d guns!\u00a0\u00a0 Those guns were to blame for this tragedy!\u00a0 And in true \u201cnever let a crisis go to waste\u201d spirit, we\u2019re already hearing rumblings about more Federal legislation to restrict exercise of rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment vice any actual discussion of what happened.<\/p>\n
Let me offer a theory to explain this.\u00a0 They\u2019re following the playbook<\/em>.\u00a0 In part, this is a deliberate attempt to change the subject and divert attention from the actual cause of the Sandy Hook massacre.<\/p>\n In fact, the political left is directly responsible for the massacre at Sandy Hook – not law-abiding gun owners or morally-neutral things called guns.\u00a0 I’ll explain why.<\/p>\n By all accounts Adam Lanza was a profoundly mentally disturbed youngster.\u00a0 While he allegedly had been determined to have Asperger\u2019s syndrome, very obviously that wasn\u2019t all that was wrong with Lanza.\u00a0 His actions prove that quite clearly.<\/p>\n Lanza\u2019s mental health issues appear to have become more pronounced as he got older.\u00a0 In fact, Lanza was so profoundly disturbed that his own mother – who’d consistently supported and protected her son, pulling\u00a0 him out of school and home-schooling him when his issues started to become severe – was apparently at her wit’s end.\u00a0 She was reportedly in the process of attempting to have her son institutionalized at the time her son murdered her.\u00a0 Indeed, her attempt to have Adam Lanza committed is thought by some to have been the trigger for his rampage.<\/p>\n Now, here\u2019s something you won\u2019t see much of in the media.\u00a0 Under Connecticut law, Lanza\u2019s mother had little to no chance of getting him involuntarily committed.\u00a0 It seems Connecticut law in general only allows people to be involuntarily committed after<\/em> they have harmed themselves or others<\/a>.\u00a0 Before they hurt someone?\u00a0 In general, you can file that under “Not Gonna Happen”.<\/p>\n That’s bad enough, but it gets even “better”.\u00a0 It also seems that Connecticut considered a change to its laws earlier this year that would have allowed Lanza to have been involuntarily committed.\u00a0 However, the proposed law did not pass the Connecticut legislature.\u00a0 It was defeated.<\/p>\n Connecticut is quite liberal.\u00a0 It is today one of the bluest of the Blue states.\u00a0 The Democratic Party rules there with an iron grip.\u00a0 It currently has in excess of a 60% majority in each house of the Connecticut General Assembly<\/a>:\u00a0 22 of 36 seats in the Connecticut Senate, and 99 of 151 seats in the House.\u00a0 The current Governor<\/a> is also a Democrat.\u00a0 Clearly, laws in Connecticut pass or fail as the Connecticut Democratic Party desires.<\/p>\n I\u2019m not a fan of making it easy to involuntarily commit a person to a mental institution.\u00a0 That’s an extreme step; it should be rare, and should always be the option of last resort. So long as a person isn’t a danger to themselves or others, and is capable of caring for themselves, more power to them – whether we consider them crazy or not.<\/p>\n But society does<\/em> have the right to protect itself.\u00a0 Some people are simply full-blown batshit crazy and are also dangers to themselves and others.\u00a0 There should<\/span> be a legal mechanism – one having\u00a0 appropriate legal due process and other safeguards – to allow dangerous lunatics to be removed from society before<\/i> they injure or kill themselves or others.<\/p>\n One doesn\u2019t need to wait for the car to roll over the cliff before hitting the brakes.\u00a0 By then, it’s too to save the driver – or the folks at the bottom of the cliff who get hit.<\/p>\n In practice, such a mechanism does not exist in Connecticut today.\u00a0 The Democratically-controlled Connecticut legislature had the chance to institute such a measure earlier this year – and refused.<\/p>\n Viewed in this context, it\u2019s easy to see why the liberal side of the political spectrum is beating the gun control drum so hard.\u00a0 IMO at least part of the reason is that they\u2019re doing so to distract attention from the fact that the blood of innocents is on their<\/em> hands.\u00a0 They’re simply trying to shift that blame to someone else.<\/p>\n They<\/em> could have acted to take Adam Lanza off the street earlier this year. And they consciously decided<\/em> to let that remain impossible, consequences be damned.<\/p>\n So if you want to see who\u2019s truly responsible for the murdered innocents at Sandy Hook, my liberal \u201cbrethren\u201d – just look in a mirror.\u00a0 You’re<\/em> the ones who decided that letting lunatics live free among you – danger to others be damned – was more important than the lives of innocents.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"