The lib media can now officially be termed obsessed with the word ´assault.´ It will take a team of psychologists to determine the reason for this particular mania.

The media keep saying a Bushmaster was "used in the Sandy Hook massacre" - but I thought the Bushmaster was simply in the guy´s trunk at Sandy Hook. So isn´t the media just being incindiary?

I live 40 miles from Webster..what the article doesn´t say: This maniac killed his 92 yr old grandmother with a hammer in 1980 ( maybe there should be a law to make it more difficult to get a hammer?). He spent only 18 yrs in prison for this...was released on to the public in ´98... as a parolee it was ILLEGAL for him to have a gun ( gee...I guess he wasn´t all that concerned about breaking the law??)

As for motive...some people are just insane.

Why are they connecting the two, OP? Because in both situations, a mentally ill individual got hold of weapons and killed people.

In many ways, this man´s case is a classic case of mental illness in America in this day and age. The care and attention of his mother kept him stable enough to live in society for a number of years after he was released from prison (where he was punished for an act almost certainly committed while he was mentally ill - point being that he was unlikely to ´learn´ from the punishment, because he still had the same brain disorder.) Once his mother died, he destabilized. There are very, very few places left in this country for a seriously mentally ill person to live. The institutions that would have once housed him have all been closed.

So we have another murder-suicide as a result of our mixed-up mental health policies.

The guy killed his grandmother with a hammer. Why was he ever released? The people who paroled him from prison should be held accountable as well.

As to why the press in continuing the assault on assault rifles, well it just fits their agenda.

If we can hold bar tenders accountable for the actions of drunks, then surely we should be able to prosecute the irresponsible idiots that turned this monster loose on the public. If there isn´t a law for this then it´s high time to make one!

It is already against the law for a convicted felon to obtain or possess a fire arm of any discription. If we´d uphold the laws we have, no new ones would be needed.

However, we don´t so we do.

He should have been executed for his crime back in 1980 and never been released.

Laws ALREADY prevented him, theoretically, from obtaining a firearm. As we see once again, prohibition doesn´t work; if you want something, you can always find a way to get it.

FTA:"Motive is always the burning question, and I´m not sure we´ll ever really know what was going through his mind," Pickering said.

A few kilowatts of electricy going through his mind in the early 80s would have saved the lives of many people. I mean, we´re talking about a monster who killed his own grandmother with a hammer! And he´s out on the streets after 17 years?

These people seem to welcome a future state where no law-abiding citizen in America has a firearm but every criminal and social misfit is armed. The ONLY logical conclusion to this situation is more murder and mayhem. Liberal logic can drive a sane person crazy.

This guy should have been in jail,he hammered his grand mother to death and tey et him out of jail.Sad story of our judicial system.

When you deliberately smash in your grandmother´s face and kill her you should NEVER be let out of jail. This is a justice and a mental illness issue.

This case is a stronger argument for capital punishment than it is for gun control.

Shouldn´t the headline read,"Insane gunman, like the one in Conn., kills firemen!"?

Why was this guy ever let out of jail?

This sad case highlights the evil success of progressivism. In a sane world, this killer would have never been released from prison. He would have been executed for his earlier crime.

Now that he has killed many others, progressives do not look at their policy of appeasement of criminals and question it. Nope, they double down and demand that the law-abiding be disenfranchised. Someone must be punished, but never the criminal.

When appeasement fails [as it always does] the response is always to demand more and better appeasement.