2nd Amendment

How the ACLU Prevented Sandyhook Murderer From Being Institutionalized

While the media attempts to smear the NRA in every conceivable manner possible, a different culprit emerges that bears some scrutiny: the ACLU.

Fox News reports on the motive of the mentally disturbed Connecticut murderer [emphasis added]:

Adam Lanza, 20, targeted Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown after killing his mother early Friday because he believed she loved the school “more than she loved him,” said Joshua Flashman, 25, who grew up not far from where the shooting took place. Flashman, a U.S. Marine, is the son of a pastor at an area church where many of the victims’ families worship.

“From what I’ve been told, Adam was aware of her petitioning the court for conservatorship and (her) plans to have him committed,” Flashman told FoxNews.com. “Adam was apparently very upset about this. He thought she just wanted to send him away. From what I understand, he was really, really angry. I think this could have been it, what set him off.”

What might have prevented his mother from having him committed? The ACLU.

From Gateway Pundit [emphasis added]:

Connecticut is one of only SIX states in the U.S. that doesn’t have a type of “assisted outpatient treatment” (AOT) law (sometimes referred to as “involuntary outpatient treatment”). There’s no one standard for these types of laws, but (roughly speaking) these are laws that allow for people with mental illness to be forcibly treated BEFORE they commit a serious crime.

Whereas previous legal standards held that the mentally ill cannot be institutionalized or medicated until they harm someone or themselves, or until they express an immediate intent to do so, AOT laws (again, roughly speaking) allow for preventative institutionalization or forced medication

So the ACLU made it tougher for Adam’s mother to institutionalize him when she might have seen signs of violent or dangerous behavior. And on the other hand, if a neighbor thought there was a reason for her guns to be taken away, there was a Connecticut law that allowed for it. So what laws failed our children here?

More from Fox News:

A senior law enforcement official involved in the investigation confirmed that Lanza’s anger at his mother over plans for “his future mental health treatment” is being looked at as a possible motive for the deadly shooting.

Flashman was told Nancy Lanza had begun filing paperwork to get conservatorship over her troubled son, but that could not be confirmed because a court official told FoxNews.com such records are sealed. The move would have been necessary for her to gain the legal right to commit an adult to a hospital or psychiatric facility against his will. A competency hearing had not yet been held.

So why is there no uproar against the ACLU for making it more difficult, if not impossible, for him to be put away by his own mother? Because the media is much too eager to stupidly assist politicians to the easy, naive, and politically correct answer: gun control.


  • Pingback: Did the ACLU Help Enable Adam Lanza by Blocking Changes to Mental Health Treatment Laws?()

  • Anonymous

    I am a disability rights advocate and I have autism. I have a couple of questions to ask:
    1) Does your point of view mean that ALL people with an autism label should be protected and put away on merely because of a diagnosis? If the answer to that question is yes, then that would mean a pre-determination stereotype that every person with autism is dangerous to himself or others.
    My point that I am explaining is that one size DOES NOT fit all. No two people with autism are ever the same, even when just looking at only the higher-functioning people. The same goes with every single developmental disability. You have to look at an individual and not the diagnosis, even when it’s made specific (for example, high-functioning autism).
    Now before you start to think that I am “naiive” and live in a “fantasy land”, I obviously do believe that Adam Lanza was dangerous to himself. I heard that he was obsessed with violence and even covered up his bedroom with green sheets. However, my story is totally different: I have never been a danger to myself or others and I do have empathy for others and can understand the rules of communication. In fact, I do believe in the right of self defense and I carry a stun gun with me wherever I go. I do not care if I or anyone has autism, if Adam Lanza (who also had autism) started shooting shooting at my university and I was right where he is, I would start running towards him while dodging the gun and then attack Adam with my stun gun (Still I wish I could bring a gun (pistol or revolver) for self defense if I could afford it and my school would allow it.)
    Psychiatry, by the way, is not a fix-it-all solution. Maybe Lanza has less brain problems that what people think and it’s that he might be just evil. I am not saying he did not have brain problems at all. I do however, agree on the point that gun control is not going to fix all the shooting problems because criminals break the law and they will get a gun by smuggling or at black markets or use something else to kill (like a knife or a pen). I can afford a spring opening knife but, unfortunately, the city I live in does not allow people to carry these knives in public.

  • Daniel

    Mental health issues and autism is NOT the reason why mass shootings like in Virginia Teach, Sandy Hook, and in Umpqua College in Oregon occur. These shootings happen because we kicked God out of school and that we are teaching kids that there is no God and we came from nothing by accident (https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/mass-shootings/if-you-dont-matter-to-god-you-dont-matter-to-anyone/, https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/mass-shootings/finland-school-shootings-the-sad-evolution-connection/) And I agree with the guy who commented here that had autism that people with mental health issues should not be automatically seen as a danger to himself or others because of a mere presence of a mental disability.