Oh bullshit. I suggested that the reason there was no footage of him buying guns was because he never tried to buy guns. I asked you for a link from a reputable source where it was stated that he tried to buy guns, you couldn’t do it.
I don’t know why there’s no footage of him at the school. No cameras? Cameras not pointed at the right spot? Plenty of perfectly rational reasons other than “he wasn’t really there”.
I’m pretty sure this is an insult, and you can’t do that in this forum. And Tollhouse, if you want this thread to continue, you need to explain what you think and why you think it. You’re insisting on a couple of debatable facts but haven’t explained why they would be significant even if they are true. Please do so.
You are grossly overestimating the difficulty of intentionally destroying a hard drive and the FBI’s ability to recover the data. The fact Lanza was a “skinny ass” has no bearing on whether or not he could damaged the drives, as very little physical strength is required. Watch the video below:
See? No super strength or special tools required. And here is an article that has some info from data recovery experts on why the recovery is difficult:
I don’t know anything about Lanza’s hard drives, but you could carefully remove my hard drive from my computer and deliver it in a velvet box to the FBI, and they wouldn’t be able to get anything off of it. That’s because it’s encrypted, which is super-easy to do.
Your post raised the question to me was it possible the reason he was not seen on footage there because news reports were wrong and he had not been there.
Usa today, Nbc news, ktla, and many others reported that he had recently attempted to buy guns at Dicks sporting goods and was denied. No footage. Why does every newsstory show footage over and over, what is so special about Lanza? I know, I know, apparently everywhere he goes it must be a “bad camera angle”
Please explain your opinion and why you believe this is relevant. There were reports in December that he tried to buy a gun, but I don’t think they panned out. There’s no reference to the story in Wikipedia or reporting more recent than December. If the story were true there could be several different reasons the security camera footage was not broadcast: for example it might not have been available to the press, or might simply have had no news value. It seems it doesn’t exist at all. Since nobody contends Lanza used those guns in his rampage anyway - he took them from his mother’s house - I don’t see why it matters. So please explain how this fits into your broader view of the crime.
Heck, it’d be nicer to simply read his ‘broader view’ of the crime.
It obviously isn’t “Adam Lanza was the perpetrator and just happened to be a lunatic shut-in before he went postal.” So… what is it? MIB’s, lizard people, the Illuminati, the Jewluminati?
This is shaping up to be an annoying rather than an entertaining CT thread.
The school had installed a excellent camera security system placed at entrance and office, so that any approaching or entering would be on video footage.
There seem to be some questions about the school security cameras. I haven’t looked into it, but why don’t you concentrate on that factor, ask why the cameras weren’t on or didn’t pick up Lanza, if you can establish that was the case. Try to leave out the open questions with a conspiracy bent, just try to get some facts first.
How is it relevant to show footage of the gunman at a gunstore attempting to buy a gun shortly before the shooting? Is that your question?
the story was reported on, they stated law enforcement verified it..if you trust law enforcement. Any other suspect in any similar case is always shown ad nauseum over and over on footage. Why did we need to see Dorner over and over on footage at an atm? Why did we need to see the columbine shooters repeatedly on school footage within days of the event? and many more
why is Lanza so special? Anywhere he goes happens to be a bad camera angle?