NBC says no "assault weapons" were used in Newtown shooting

this is what "fringe" people have been saying all along. 4 pistols with a "rifle" (looks more like a saiga 12) in the trunk of his car. no ar15 was used...

im surprised that they're going back on their original claims of "all were shot with the semi-automatic rapid fire bushmaster ar15 assault rifle"


edit: these videos are old. i thought i was watching new videos. @_@

.

They said that on day one but then the media changed it and never went back.
.

imagine if all 4 guns had 10rd capacity each

I seem to remember seeing a video the evening of the shooting, showing a police officer pulling the ar out of the trunk and clearing the weapon showing it was never taken inside the school.

Did you look at the date of the video??? Every single news agency was reporting something different.

There is video of them removing what appears to be a Benelli (?) from the trunk of his car however, it is not an AR.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewv...king_Lot_Newtown_Connecticut_School_Shooting/

that is the video I remember you are correct some sort of shotgun, couldn't remember as I had only seen it once.

Old video....The consensus seems to be that yes, the Bushmaster WAS used in the shootings, and that the "rifle" taken from the trunk nd cleared was actually not a rifle at all, but a Saiga shotgun. Of course, people will continue to believe what they want to believe.

Would it be so far-fetched as to say that certain members of either law enforcement, government, the city, etc were paid a nice sum of money to change the story of the two handguns to the assault rifle.

I too read the media reports for the first day and all of them said it was a Sig Sauer and Glock that was used in the shootings. I've yet to read a news report that was so consistent in identifying the weapon used by multiple news reporting agencies and then suddenly be changed within the next day or two. Something seem very strange to me, as I do keep up with all the mass shooting hysteria news articles and this was a first!

I bet a few months ago people would have handed me a tin-foil hat.. What do people think today?/

The first reports about only handguns being used were early on in the coverage, before the facts were actually known. It wasn't so much as a changing of the story as it was an update with accurate facts, formed after the initial chaos was over, and people could actually start to put together what had actually taken place. The conspiracy theorists seized on the initial report as though it were indisputable fact, when in reality it was simply an inaccuracy reported in the midst of a very chaotic situation, that was later amended to reflect the truth. I DO NOT biy these theories, as no factual information has come out to support the idea only the two handguns were used. Of course, with the current climate being what it is, there will be no shortage of those that believe it actually IS conspiracy. I simply don't see any evidence to back the conspiracies. Inaccurate reporting, when the facts are still developing and coming clear, is a fact of life. Why do people continually doubt the accuracy of the mainstream media, up until an error seemingly works in their favor? Then, its as if the MSM is infallible, that everything they report is 100% accurate. You can't have it both ways, people. Either we have to admit the MSM makes mistakes and has the potential to be dishonest, or we believe everything they tell us, no matter contrary to common sense it may be. I think the media erred here, not that theres a big conspiracy to demonize the AR-15 in this case.

So who has evidence that a Bushmaster AR-15 was actually used?

Some news outlets still say it was not used.... Heard it this week on the radio. Abc?

I think that Sandy Hook trutherism is

1: A pointless and irrelevant distraction from the actual debate over the RKBA

2: Is politically suicidal to our side of that debate. We have enough dingbats running their mouths already (I'm looking at you, Wayne LaPierre) on the national media providing all the cherry picked evidence the anti gun side needs to portray gun owners as sweaty, unhinged mouth breathers, without turning Sandy Hook, which was a very bad thing that actually did happen, resulting in the pointless deaths of actual, verifiable people, into the same sort of inane conspiracy as the 'dispute' over the President's place of birth. Such behavior, if indulged, rightly leads the public to conclude that the party promoting such drivel are unhinged loons of the sort that probably shouldn't bear arms, for their own safety, as well as that of the general public.

With all warranted respect, please cease and desist advancing this counterproductive line of argument.

LemmyCaution said:

Is politically suicidal to our side of that debate. We have enough dingbats running their mouths already (I'm looking at you, Wayne LaPierre)

Click to expand...

What exactly did Wayne LaPierre say that wasn't true? Everyone said he was a madman and lunatic for suggesting they put arm guards in school and now, lo and behold, Obama is trying to allocate funds to help fund security in schools. A lot of liberal news outlets are saying the NRA is the new KKK.. DO you really think they could have possibly said anything to entice any of those who oppose the 2nd Amendment and the NRA? Not likely.

NRA is "Damned If They Do, Damned If They Don't" by both sides of people on the fence.


I actually found this video to be quite inspiring and sobering. Wayne pointed out a very hard and cold fact that will even keep the liberals thinking:
http://www.nrastandandfight.com/america-agrees.html

You can't even call this garbage a "conspiracy theory". It's certainly not even close to theory.

This thing goes round and round. Who has the obligation to debunk these? Some are easy. The NBC report was just early and wrong speculation. I can't even believe people keep posting it over and over on every gun related website. That and the stupid "same little girl in these pictures" lunacy (even using the word "resurrected") .

Heck even Wiki is better than some posters here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting

I'm not the kind of person who really needs to know the minutia of these heinous crimes, heck I really never even set out to find out much in detail about Columbine. But the level of detail I do need to know is the truth about the firearms, the drugs the killer was using, and perhaps other entwined information such as psychiatric treatment, criminal history - so the despicable slimy politicians and 90% of the press can't use the death of children to attack law abiding citizens. I want to know when and how does the truth come out? Is there any obligation on the local authorities? The coroner in Sandy Hook certainly didn't help much. The press is a complete joke as we have seen. Where does one go to get the truth? That's the question.

Even though there are plenty of incongruities, I do not think SH was any sort of hoax; however, I do think our Federal government/media "coalition" is massaging the story line for political gain. The President surrounded himself with children to announce his 23 Tyrannies, right!?

Where's our side of the message? Where's the sane, rational, educated and erudite spokesman on the side of Freedom? In truth, there are lots of them, but they're out-shouted by media darling antis who get all the podium time and are backed by the emotional tsunami that the media keeps filling viewers with misinformation.

The debate is being tilted away from Freedom through intentional muddying of the SH waters. Somebody knows what really happened at SH, and someday he'll write a book.

Please show me the evidence of a Bushmaster AR-15 being used at Sandy Hook?

You know I was thinking a lot of these conspiracy theories were far-fetched until I saw this video. This was supposedly the father of one of the children who was murdered giving a statement. He is smiling and laughing with people until the cameras start rolling on him when then he changes to a sad face and acts as if he is crying.

Leaving all conspiracy theories aside, just watch this video, start at 3:11 and tell me yourself, if your little child was brutally murdered, would 99 out of 100 people act like this guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sino1wwm3cs

To me it seems like a bad acting job, but who knows, maybe he is just a very weird guy who acts like he is a bad actor when mourning.

Compare the video the day after the shooting to a little later, where suddenly he is all broken up crying.. Wouldn't he be doing more crying right immediately after the news of his daughter's death. Also, Just watching the performance, I get this feeling in my stomach: "bad actor".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYXVhumVrgs

It even gets weirder. Emily's aunt, Jill, gave her own statement, which you could see in the above video, where it says she would be an example to her older sisters, but it turns out that Emily Parker only had younger sisters!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv3XJ6Qi4PA

Perhaps, the aunt in her mourning forgot her sisters were younger, not older? Strange again.

There was just a lot of strange things that occurred in this event.. This being one of the strangest to me.


This youtube video gave me the creeps.. Why? If someone can debunk the video, please let me know. Notice that Obama is with an almost identical looking girl dressed in the same exact dress as Emilie Parker after the Newton school massacre. Yes, this video should maybe be seen wearing your foil hat. Nonetheless, these are real photos, until proven otherwise. Does anyone else notice that the dress warn by the blonde girl that Obama is holding matches exactly the dress of Emilie Parker? Yes, this sent chills down my spine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSnhYMaGYuY

I have yet to see any actual evidence of anything yet.

the closest thing I've seen to evidence so far is the short video of a LEO clearing a shotgun at the trunk of a car, and all that proves is that an officer had a shotgun at the trunk of a car and was clearing it at the time of the video.

That video is dated Dec. 15. It was made hours after the shooting and before the details were clear. It was long ago determined to have been inaccurate. The kid did in fact use an AR in the shooting. The video link in incorrect.

This has been a media circus with every one wanting to be first but they failed to get the facts straight.

Even if it were to come out that an AR wasn't used, it doesn't matter. "They" got what they want out of this: The attack on the 2nd Amendment. Period. We need to continue THAT fight. Remember, it isn't about the truth with these people, they needed a catalyst, and they got it. Whether it was "trumped up" or not makes no difference.

This was and older video (the next day actually) when information was still sketchy. If you'll remember they didn't even have the name of the shooter right for a few hours and they thought that Adam Lanza was actually his brother.

The consensus after everything settled down seems to be the he carried the Bushmaster and two handguns into the school and left a shotgun in the trunk.