The Newtown killer’s guns “mystery”

question markOne good rule of thumb to bear in mind is that, in fast-moving news events, much of what the media report at the beginning is going to be erroneous, false, or fabricated outright. First, that’s how they roll: people who go into the media want to change the world, and have no overarching moral structure or ethical framework beyond Marxian utilitarianism. Second, people go in the media because they like telling stories, and stories are best with a beginning, middle and end, and a good guy in a white hat and a bad guy in a black one: so that’s how media stories come out. Third and last, their industry punishes tardiness in publication, but there are few or no consequences for falsehood, even deliberate falsehood. That’s especially true if the falsehood furthers a standard media narrative.

You can see this by examining the post-exposure careers of prominent journalistic fabricators and frauds: all of them still write or deliver news for a living. Jayson Blair, a man whose name is the word-association prizewinner for “fabricated story”, lectures on media ethics, for Christ’s sake. That’s like springing Bernard Madoff to lecture Wall Street on fiduciary duty, or entering Jeffrey Dahmer in Iron Chef, but media guys are like that.

The weapons of the Newtown school shooting are one of those things where reports have been all over the place. One problem with crummy jump-the-gun reporting is that it leaves all kinds of rubbish lying around. Journalists are never held accountable for their falsehoods and fabrications, let alone for the very predictable second-order effect of conflcting stories: long-legged conspiracy theories. We;ve been bombarded with Newtown conspiracy theories, most of which seem to suggest that somehow Eric Holder had the massacre staged to generate more demand for gun control.

If you’ve worked in government as we have, the very idea is preposterous. Government couldn’t pour piss out of a boot, even with cartoon instructions printed on the boot itself, and now people think it pulled off a conspiracy for the ages? Certainly, the history of ATF operations like Wide Receiver and Fast & Furious shows that Holder and Co. wouldn’t cavil morally at such a proposal, but if you look at what happened to those operations — they were leaked and have gotten into the public consciousness despite a wide news blackout — you have to realize that they couldn’t do it.

But among the inept and nontransparent investigation of the Newtown massacre with its concomitant confusing official releases, the inept and dishonest performance of the media, and the primate-poo-flinging emanating from the conspiracy chimpanzee citadel, it’s understandable folks are confused about what tools the creep-who-shall-go-unnamed was carrying when he set about his malevolent work.  Others have handled this rather well, so we’ll excerpt and link ‘em for your edification.

First, Extrano’s Alley:

Someone came by searching for “what type of guns did the newton killer use.”

Assuming the event wanted was the weapons used in the Newtown, Connecticut mass shooting, the situation is nothing short of a mess.

via What Type Of Guns Did The Newtown Killer Use | Extrano’s Alley, a gun blog.

Highly recommend Stranger’s analysis there, although we don’t think you’ll want to suffer through the mainstream media speculative report playlist that’s the video he hosts.

Here’s an example of a blog report that starts off reading too much into early media reports, and then ends quoting the official statements.

Our take: the media reports are all over the place, but officialdom said he had a SIG and a Glock and a 5.56mm rifle on him, and at least one more gun in the car, and that all the killing but the suicide shot was done with the rifle. So we’ll go with that until we see convincing evidence from credible sources of something different. (Connecticut State Police: credible. Conspiracy emails: not credible).

Bear in mind that the many websites now saying things like “there was no rifle”  have no evidence for that proposition, and can only get to that point by selectively quoting the early, unreliable media reports. It’s ironic that many of the people doing this profess very little trust in the mass media. You think the TV networks mostly sling bullshit, but you discredit the official report (Newtown, 9/11, Warren Commission) because it conflicts with something from an initial, hip-shot TV newser? Wait, what?

Remember that the media does have its incentives skewed in favor of an early, false report, while the Connecticut State Police and the Medical Examiner are tasked to take due time to produce a factual, accurate-as-possible report. Because people want information, information springs up to fill the demand in that interstitial period before officialdom publishes (which is why they should be issuing interim, factual reports) but that information springing up from dubious sources is BOGINT and should be disregarded.

Best available facts: rhe killer took a Bushmaster rifle and two pistols into the school. He did most if not all of the killing with the rifle. He then killed himself with one of the pistols. What weapon he used to murder his mother is not known.

10 thoughts on “The Newtown killer’s guns “mystery”

  1. jimbo

    OK……let me ask you this….is the truth abt an historical event (which the Sandy Hook shooting now is) determined by media reports or by a careful, independent inquiry like a Coronial Inquest for instance, eh?!?

    it’s easy to sling mud @ so-called “conspiracy theorists” but when the official accounts are so self-contradictory…..it pretty much invites talks of a major cover-up of sorts, eh?!?

    (exmpl: how about these early reports of multiple shooters?…..that has not been satisfactorily answered….just dropped down “the memory hole” by the controlled, corrupt anti-gun media!!)

    cops can say any-thing to the media…and not necessarily be held accountable for it….but…when they are on the witness stand under oath…..then….it is quite a different story, eh?!?

    no final judgements on an event as important as this one…..which could well result in a major attack on the Second Amendment……should be entered into and, above all, NO major political legislation should be enacted until a full, in-depth, public inquiry is held…..that may take months or, even, a year or more!!

    in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act!!

    (this ‘post’ is largely directed @ the owner of the “gunwatch” blog who, it seems, is too bloody GUTLESS to post the many, many discrepancies and questions that are being asked about this incident!)

    1. Hognose Post author

      There are always discrepancies in initial reports of a major event. Always. The initial reports, whether media or officialdom, almost always are revised. Of course there are “discrepancies.”

      The early reports of multiple shooters, for instance, came about because the cops kept looking for another shooter even after they were pretty sure they had one shooter down. Why? They had no way of knowing they just had one scumbag to deal with, and not a couple scumbags like in Columbine.

      There have been few discrepancies in the “official accounts” because there have been very few releases of official information. Unfortunately, the State Police statement and the Coroner statement are not officially published, and were only delivered at press conferences, so we only got them as filtered through the media.

      When a reporter writes, “officials said” without naming the officials, that’s a different thing. That’s either a leak, or a fabrication. Naturally these will differ from the official statements.

      Your suggestion that any major action inspired by an event be held until the event is understood is a very good suggestion, but one unlikely to be taken up by grandstanding politicians. Recall the legislative mess that came out of 9/11 — in most cases, it made the problems that led to the intel failure worse.

  2. Concerned Parent

    I am a legal gun owner who submitted to background checks, completed the appropriate training, and take gun ownership seriously. As law-abiding citizens we are expected to navigate the labyrinth of conflicting state laws regarding firearms and we do successfully everyday. Although many of these laws are conflicting between neighboring states, we still respect them and abide by them everyday.

    With 300 million firearms in private hands (one-third of them pistols), the overwhelming majority of gun owners ARE responsible, law-abiding citizens, which is why horrific massacres are not commonplace, but rather terrible outliers that can never be legislated away (e.g. DC, Chicago, and “Gun Free Zones”).

    For several examples for the recent use of firearms for defensive purposes not typically reported by the national media please visit: http://www.equalforce.net and forward this site to others to whom this information may be useful. @forceequalizer

  3. Concerned Parent

    Look closely at this video, it is the only physical evidence that I have seen confirming the type of rifle and where it was found. Despite all of the conflicting information, it’s hard to dispute video evidence from NBC News.

    Rifle found in XXXXXXXXXXX’s trunk not an assault rifle nor an AR-15 Bushmaster – Watch NBC videos: http://bit.ly/UvJ4ik equalforce.net

    1. Hognose Post author

      You’re joking, right?
      1. NBC News are the guys that did a major investigation into “exploding GM trucks” only to be eviscerated when GM exposed the source of the explosions — NBC rigged the trucks with pyrotechnic devices on the gas tanks.

      2. The weapon being removed from the trunk is a shotgun. Looks to us like a Remington or clone thereof. The CSP statement said that the shooter (whose name I have edited out of your post, these assholes don’t need the publicity) took a shotgun and left it in the trunk. His rifle was not in the trunk, it was inside with his body. If you watched the actual press conference instead of youtube conspiracy buff videos you’d know that.

  4. jimbo

    There are always discrepancies in initial reports of a major event. Always. The initial reports, whether media or officialdom, almost always are revised. Of course there are “discrepancies.”

    maybe…..except that the inconsistencies, anomalies and discrepancies in this particular case are so wide-spread, so numerous and so intractable as to cast grave doubt on most if not all of the official story!!

    if we think of any historical explanation as an hypothesis (a valid analogy!), then, this hypothesis of the lone nut gun-man, “XXXXXXXXXXX”, must, inevitably, fail because it is not making provable, testable and concrete claims!!

    take a look @ the Y-tb vid of the so-called “Medical Examiner”, H Wayne Carver II ……. now…..assuming that actually is the medical examiner, his on-camera performance seems quite bizarre, to say the least……he is either drunk/on drugs or he has been scared out of his wits!!…..one may well ask why he was surrounded by ½-dzn or more cops when he was making his statement?

    what goes on here?

    @ the very least, this whole “investigation” exhibits such a high level of slip-shod incompetence & amateurishness as to warrant a totally independent investigative body taking it over!!

    since the ramifications and implications of this incident are so serious, i would suggest that it warrants the involvement of a competent, trust-worthy and professional team of dedicated private investigators!!……..which could well take several months……if their conclusions agreed more or less with the official story….OK!!…..if not……then…..well…..we take it from there, eh?!?………let the cards fall where they may!!

    ( [DELETED] article on the Sandy Hook massacre ….by Prfssr James F Tracy of Florida Atlantic University)

    1. Hognose Post author

      I have made two edits to your comment. I deleted the name of the shooter — don’t see why you conspiracy buffs feel the need to promote these guys’ names — and I deleted the link to a conspiracy site. Don’t see why my readership should boost their Page Rank. I did read the page, and it’s illogical and illiterate for a professor — let alone a guy who purports to teach Communications. Lord love a duck! It’s full of guff about the long gun being in the trunk, there being two or three shooters, etc. If you look at what Tracy writes elsewhere, no whacky conspiracy seems to be beyond him. He’s Professor Art Bell!

      Re: some of your specific points, paragraph by paragraph:

      1. If I follow the logic of your first paragraph, you’re saying: if many loosely sourced or unsourced early media reports conflict with later statements from the investigating authorities, then this casts “grave doubt” on the authorities. My dear fellow, you have it exactly backwards.

      2. Your second paragraph does not make any sense at all. Try to write in clear direct declarative sentences. Do not pretend to be educated; pretend not to be if that’s what it takes to write clearly.

      3. Third graf:
      a. Yes that is the Medical Examiner. It may amaze you, but real people in these jobs don’t look or speak like actors in TV dramas.
      b. You’re apparently unfamiliar with the effect a full-court media press has on individuals who normally only speak to two or three local reporters.
      c. You’re apparently unfamiliar with investigative press conferences. Every camera-hog white shirt in every relevant PD claims a space on the stage.

      4. Fourth graf I’ll take as a rhetorical question, although it does seem possible you can’t grasp what was going on there.

      5. Fifth graf: let me get this straight. You, some anonymous troll venting your spleen on the Internet, are giving us the benefit of your comprehensive training in, and vast experience with, investigations? Based on one press conference, and a bunch of news media reports. And I suppose you’re volunteering yourself, and your comprehensive training and vast experience, to serve as one of the anonymous troll investigative brigade you propose in the sixth graf.

      Guys like you are why we made the rule about real names for non-SOF commenters, a rule we’ve let slide over the last year.

      By the way, fans of James Tracy — who’s not a full professor, just an associate — ought to read what his students think. It’s a mixed bag, but “socialist who hates America” comes up a couple of times. (That should keep him on the tenure track at FAU).
      http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=643615&all=true

      But notice, we may not like him but we don’t put his title or his school’s in scare quotes. That particular expression of contempt is just childish, and doesn’t impress anyone — certainly not the regulars here.

      1. Hognose Post author

        This reply produced an even longer and even more incoherent rant by the conspiracy troll. Read about two lines and deleted it. He’s banned. Some asshole had to be first. If he wants to shout spittle at the stars, he can get his own blog.

  5. Anonymous

    I’m glad you think our government isn’t capable of telling a lie. Perhaps a history lesson is in order for you. While some in government may have trouble following instructions to tie a shoelace, there are others that are more intelligent and more dangerous than you are apparently willing to admit. Just a brief history of times the government has not only lied, but killed Americans in the process as a means to an end:

    http://www.infowars.com/a-brief-history-of-false-flag-attacks-or-why-government-loves-state-sponsored-terror/

    I am not weighing in on this specific conspiracy theory, just want to remind those of you who believe it’s impossible that our government “could ever do such a thing” that not only CAN they, but they ALREADY HAVE.

    1. Hognose Post author

      Ah, makes our day, another anonymous conspiracy troll.

      The government’s perfectly capable of telling a lie — it’s made up of people. What it’s incapable of doing is keeping a secret. There’s never anything credible at Infowars — that’s the drooling 9/11 twoofers who are still raving about controlled detonations and WTC 7.

Comments are closed.