Social Networks We Use

Categories

CT Tech Junkie Feed

Video Review | Fujitsu ScanSnap ix100 Mobile Document Scanner
Oct 12, 2014 3:35 pm
Fujitsu’s ScanSnap scanners are known for scanning large volumes of documents quickly while capturing both sides of a...more »
Video | iPhone 6 Review - Is it worth the upgrade?
Sep 20, 2014 8:26 am
The release of a new iPhone has almost become an Autumn holiday — especially for the hundreds of eager customers who more »

Our Partners

˜

Sandy Hook Report Unlikely To Include Analysis of Gunman

by Hugh McQuaid | Aug 15, 2014 1:46pm
(14) Comments | Commenting has expired

Hugh McQuaid Photo

Hamden Mayor Scott Jackson

When the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission releases its final report in about six weeks, it’s unlikely to include an analysis of Adam Lanza, the 20-year-old man who murdered 20 first-graders and six educators in Newtown.

“Our report is not going to be a deconstruction of Adam Lanza,” Hamden Mayor Scott Jackson, the panel’s chairman, said Friday.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy created the advisory panel soon after the 2012 shooting and charged the group with thoroughly reviewing the incident and making recommendations. The commission — made up of experts in education, mental health, law enforcement, and emergency response — issued an interim report before the legislature passed a bill including stricter gun laws last year. But the panel has taken its time in drafting final recommendations.

Jackson and other members have sought access to more information on Lanza before issuing a report. The group had sought the cooperation of the deceased gunman’s father, Peter Lanza, in an effort to obtain Adam Lanza’s mental health records. And in June, Jackson said his panel was waiting on a report from the Office of the Child Advocate, which he hoped provide the group with an accurate picture of the shooter.

On Friday, Jackson said the panel never received the information it was seeking regarding Lanza and would release its final report without that information. Instead, the report will focus on recommendations to make schools and communities safer places, he said.

“Given the adaptability of people intent on doing bad actions, you don’t want to fight yesterday’s war,” he said. “We have to set in place processes and procedure that allow for the development of safer schools and infrastructure.”

During a Friday meeting of the group in Hartford, some members said they would prefer not to finalize the report until more details about the shooter were released in the Child Advocate’s report.

Dr. Harold Schwartz, head psychiatrist at Hartford Hospital’s Institute of Living, told the panel he would like the group to stick with its earlier goal of including more information about Lanza and the shooting. He said the Child Advocate’s office has met with the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit and has had access to information that belongs in the group’s report.

“That would require, perhaps, a delay of another additional couple of months or a few months. I’m as eager as anyone else to get a report out, I understand the impetus to do so. At this stage of the game, I don’t know that a delay of this kind of additional time would have a significant impact on the public’s safety. I doubt it would,” he said during the meeting.

Jackson said he and Schwartz had a “difference of opinion” on the issue. But he said the panel could try to get a timeline from the Child Advocate’s office and he was open to revising the commission’s report to include new information when it is released.

Jackson told reporters it was time to start setting expectations for the report. He said the document would “not be an intellectual exercise.”

“We have a tragic circumstance that galvanized us for one of those brief moments in history, where class didn’t matter and race didn’t matter and which side of an invisible line you lived on didn’t matter. We were all hurting. We all had a moral response to that tragedy. Some reports can tend toward the intellectual, whereas I think we need to stake the moral ground on this,” he said. “We are recommending these things because they are right.”

Jackson said the report is likely to include recommendations on gun control policy. It’s an issue the panel addressed in its interim report before the state legislature passed its own firearm regulations. The bill expanded the number of firearms prohibited in Connecticut to include weapons similar to the gun used in the shooting and banned the sale of ammunition magazines that carry more than 10 rounds.

“There will certainly be a validation or a verification or a change to [the gun control recommendations] we issued in our interim report,” Jackson said.

Tags: , , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |

(14) Comments

posted by: Noteworthy | August 15, 2014  3:03pm

Jackson said it’s time to set the expectations for the report. What he meant to say was “It’s time set low expectations for the report.”

posted by: GBear423 | August 15, 2014  3:08pm

GBear423

ok ok, did this sound funny to anyone else?
““There will certainly be a validation or a verification or a change to [the gun control recommendations] we issued in our interim report,” Jackson said “

Did he just basically say that ‘there certainly will be Change or No Change to the interim report’?

I think we all know the conclusion will be guns are bad, mm’kay.

posted by: Fisherman | August 15, 2014  10:13pm

... not be an intellectual exercise? REPORT: Guns bad. Black garbage bags for curtains are OK.
End of Report.

posted by: ASTANVET | August 16, 2014  9:48am

Jeez, why would we want to include the single biggest factor in the mass shooting?  the shooter!  what a political hack job!

posted by: Joebigjoe | August 16, 2014  10:03am

Hey it’s not our right to get a report on a mentally ill crazed gunman. That would offend other mentally ill crazed people out there and even worse than that it would alert us to signs in certain people that we should look out for and we wouldn’t want that.

posted by: dano860 | August 16, 2014  7:38pm

From the begining it was to be a sham. Another knee jerk reaction to placate the LIV and those afraid of the truth.
Dannel put together a group of people that weren’t given a clear charge, mandate or understanding of what the outcome had to encompass.
The end result will predominantly be
“,black firearms are scary and are the real problem.”

posted by: Sarah Darer Littman | August 17, 2014  2:17pm

With all due respect, what about the “responsible gun owners” (father and mother) who taught the “mentally ill crazed person” how to shoot, bought the “mentally ill crazed person” guns, knew the “mentally ill crazed person had issues yet didn’t keep the guns secured or remove them out of the house, when a few weeks before the mother allegedly told friends “I’m losing him?”

posted by: GBear423 | August 18, 2014  6:28am

GBear423

Yes the Mother paid for her blatant and gross irresponsibility. :/

The only thing she did wrong is trust that her child would not do the unthinkable…

posted by: ASTANVET | August 18, 2014  7:14am

Sarah - i believe ALL of that should be in the report… that’s the point.

posted by: DrHunterSThompson | August 18, 2014  7:25am

DrHunterSThompson

Mindblowing.

It’s all about the shooter, his family, and how he got off the rails and had access to firearms. If the report is not covering that, then there is no report. Right?

Help me here, what is this nitwit saying?

HST

posted by: GuilfordResident | August 18, 2014  8:55am

What about the inaction of the friends Nancy Lanza told of her son who may have known there were also firearms in the house. I’ve always felt there were people who knew of the situation (community, municipal, or state) who could have contacted state or local police to investigate and have firearms impounded. The state does this many hundreds of time annually. I can’t imagine what the parents are going though. However, these reactions are impacting all of our civil liberties.

posted by: GBear423 | August 18, 2014  12:50pm

GBear423

A point that being a parent I think of.:

First, stipulate that my kid has had no violent outbursts in harming others or herself.  She is diagnosed with Aspberger’s (non-violent syndrome) There has been no signs that I as a parent have been aware of that she has an unusual fascination with gun violence (teens play call of duty ALOT, she happens to be excellent at this game). And that recently there was a home invasion where a woman and her 2 girls were raped and murdered in an affluent neighborhood.
My kid is trained in the use of firearms and also in gun safety, which is incorporated into that training.

Why would you lock the firearms up from the kid (age 20, so is an adult) who may at times be left home alone?

posted by: Sarah Darer Littman | August 18, 2014  4:26pm

Gbear - “the only thing wrong was to trust that her child wouldn’t do the unthinkable”

Actually, I would totally dispute that point. Reading through the first report, there were any number point things that she did wrong. As a mother with a child on the spectrum myself, I have the utmost compassion for anyone who faces both the joys and challenges of raising a child with such difficulties. It isn’t easy. But I was FURIOUS when I read the extent to which she enabled her son. Being supportive to your child doesn’t mean enabling. She might have paid for her mistakes with her life, but 26 innocent people also paid for her enabling and mistakes with theirs. See: http://sarahdlittman.blogspot.com/2013/11/enabling-isnt-love-important-takeaway.html

posted by: Joebigjoe | August 18, 2014  6:15pm

The fact is even if her son never shot anyone she was a horrible mother and also mentally ill.

1) You don’t allow your child to put plastic bags over their windows in your house.

2) You don’t allow your child to put a lock on their door, so you can’t have access to the room, in your house.

3) You dont allow a child to dictate when and how they will speak to you in your house and allow them tell you that when they feel like it they will only do it by email.

The fact is that this committee doesnt want to really touch mental illness nor does the government. You can ban inanimate objects and say that you are doing something wonderful, but once you try to define mental illness and define people with mental illness it never ends.

Its not just the psychotic killers, it’s the few autistic kids that hurt other kids in school, its the non-autistic kids that make it their mission to make other kids not even want to go to school, its the mom that doesnt know how to parent or is a helicopter parent and controls everything about their childs life. It’s the dad that drinks himself into oblivion because he cant stand his life and never grew up into being a man, so has to get bombed every weekend, and thinks thats OK. Its the parents that think its OK to smoke a little dope with their kids and their friends. There are so many mentally ill people out there it’s mind boggling.

I complain that this committee and the government doesnt do anything about it, but I will state unequivacably that if they do something and the ACLU and mental health groups arent up in arms then they haven’t really done anything.