Newtown Officials Vote to Raze Home of Sandy Hook Gunman

[Godhead]

It would be better for the people of Newtown to learn from their mistake and provide firearms for their teachers rather then once again rely on useless security measures like video camera's.

Nah, what if the teacher is out of the room when an attack happens, or is slow on the mark and gets shot first? I say provide firearms for the children and watch stranger danger become a thing of the past.

What happens if the kids forget how to turn the safety off? Your idea will never work. No what we need is to fingerprint ID all the children to their parents and their school faculty, so if anybody touches them who isn't them has the child blow up in their face. It's foolproof.

True, but you don't need to touch a kid to shoot them right? What we need is an automatic scanning system that recognises faces of the pupils, parents and teachers and if anyone unlicensed enters the school, the building instantaneously self-destructs using heavy explosives. It's the only way to be sure!

God, how did I not think of this? I'll get on the phone with Obama, this is going to be bigger than the Star Wars defense.

Captcha: Turn the tables. You heard it here first folks.

 

[Lilani]

Kind of pathetic really. I mean what does this accomplish aside from some feel good?

Disturbing too. Kind of reminds me of the whole "Unperson" thing.

A lot of elements of American justice involves making people "feel good." People fight to keep execution alive even though it's proven to be more expensive than keeping prisoners incarcerated for life and has never been proven to be an effective deterrent against crime. Solitary confinement remains a standard go-to punishment for unruly prisoners even though it's only ever proven to make prisoners more violent, more depressed, and more likely to be jailed again after release. Prison rape is seen as a just bonus punishment, especially when it happens to sex offenders.

Hopefully one day people finally understand all of these things are biting us in the ass in a huge way and making people less safe on the whole.

 

[Remus]

Now if only the gunman were inside and wearing a red and green sweater.... What? I'm just saying, reactions like this predate the era of school shootings we now find ourselves in. So they're not likely to change anytime soon.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

I support it. The community has been through a lot and that house is a symbol on top of a tourist draw for the pain they've endured. If tearing down an unoccupied ward of the state using funds accrued for the specific intent of benefitting the survivors will give them some closure, I'd say go for it.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

I'm going to have to agree with others here, this is a rather pathetic action. I don't buy the argument that this is to get rid of a source of bad memories for the residents, because that would only require the demolition of the house. But the fact that they are incinerating the contents of the house just makes it seem rather vindictive and borderline superstitious (making sure they don't become memorabilia seems a cop-out).

 

[PsychicTaco115]

At the very least, we won't see any Amityville Horror-esque movies coming out, with "BASED ON A TRUE STORY" flashing in the trailers

I'd consider that a cinematic win

 

[Fox12]

And once we have burned their property to the ground, we must salt the earth, so that nothing will ever grow there again.

Or, you know, we could all just try to move on with our lives, and stop trying to waste time and resources.

 

[Mezahmay]

I support it. The community has been through a lot and that house is a symbol on top of a tourist draw for the pain they've endured. If tearing down an unoccupied ward of the state using funds accrued for the specific intent of benefitting the survivors will give them some closure, I'd say go for it.

I don't understand how that would bring closure. Now instead of the house being a symbol, the empty lot is a scar on the neighborhood that carries the same weight once the immediate satisfaction of the thing being razed wears off. If they really wanted to move on then they should have just kept it as a house so it can become something else. Instead of being THAT house, it's the Smith residence or whatever. Afterall, the best way to dispatch of an enemy is to make them your friend.

 

[Lilani]

I support it. The community has been through a lot and that house is a symbol on top of a tourist draw for the pain they've endured. If tearing down an unoccupied ward of the state using funds accrued for the specific intent of benefitting the survivors will give them some closure, I'd say go for it.

I don't understand how that would bring closure. Now instead of the house being a symbol, the empty lot is a scar on the neighborhood that carries the same weight once the immediate satisfaction of the thing being razed wears off. If they really wanted to move on then they should have just kept it as a house so it can become something else. Instead of being THAT house, it's the Smith residence or whatever. Afterall, the best way to dispatch of an enemy is to make them your friend.

Exactly. It's never going to truly go away. And the fact that the town spent further money and resources to tear it down just adds more infamy to the place.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

Snip

Snip

What's wrong with them trying? It was also a tourist spot and now there's nothing. Either another house will be built or it'll be turned into a park.

There is a lot of cold hostility towards them in this thread, particularly this one.

And once we have burned their property to the ground, we must salt the earth, so that nothing will ever grow there again.

Or, you know, we could all just try to move on with our lives, and stop trying to waste time and resources.

It's fun being judgemental behind a computer screen with no stake in what's going on.

 

[Lilani]

What's wrong with them trying? It was also a tourist spot and now there's nothing. Either another house will be built or it'll be turned into a park.

There is a lot of cold hostility towards them in this thread, particularly this one.

The problem is the thing that they're trying to do. They aren't trying to recover or heal, they're trying to achieve retribution. They're destroying a house for no reason other than to get revenge against someone who's already dead. It isn't healthy or helpful.

Some of us are just too tired of revenge being an acceptable reason for civic or government action in America.

 

[Rabbitboy]

I don't think I would have a problem living there. It just seems a massive waste to me.

 

[Fox12]

Snip

Snip

snip

This isn't about healing, it's about a poor sense of retribution. I can understand the school, to some extent, since it was old and needed renovation anyway, and since children and adults would have to go there on a daily basis, but this? Why do they care? Most of them probably don't even know where the house is, and I doubt they see it on a daily basis. The only reason for doing this is to try and get back at the gunman. But the gunman is dead. They want revenge, but there's no one left to get revenge against. His mothers dead. His fathers dead. The gunmans dead. If there's a hell, he's burning in it now. This isn't a healthy way for a government to respond to something, and it isn't solving any problems. That money could have gone toward helping the families, or to charity. It could have been used to build up something up. Instead it was used to tear something down. And that's a damn shame.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

The problem is the thing that they're trying to do. They aren't trying to recover or heal, they're trying to achieve retribution. They're destroying a house for no reason other than to get revenge against someone who's already dead. It isn't healthy or helpful.

Some of us are just too tired of revenge being an acceptable reason for civic or government action in America.

This isn't about healing, it's about a poor sense of retribution. I can understand the school, to some extent, since it was old and needed renovation anyway, and since children and adults would have to go there on a daily basis, but this? Why do they care? Most of them probably don't even know where the house is, and I doubt they see it on a daily basis. The only reason for doing this is to try and get back at the gunman. But the gunman is dead. They want revenge, but there's no one left to get revenge against. His mothers dead. His fathers dead. The gunmans dead. If there's a hell, he's burning in it now. This isn't a healthy way for a government to respond to something, and it isn't solving any problems. That money could have gone toward helping the families, or to charity. It could have been used to build up something up. Instead it was used to tear something down. And that's a damn shame.

They're tearing down a house. A house that is now the property of the state as there's no one present who inherited it. The only significance the house has is as a symbol of the pain they've endured which, as I have pointed out a few times, is now a draw for tourists. Over dead kids. The house touches a nerve in the community which has elected to tear it down. Getting back at a gunman isn't the sole reason, and in my opinion, not an unreasonable one either. He's dead now, so he's not receiving undue punishment. The importance of the residence is in the eyes of the community and the tourists whom the community would rather not have. It may forever be "that crazy guy's house" but if no longer having to look at it thus preventing immortalization helps them move on using funds that were received for the expressed purpose of benefitting the survivors, then I'd say go for it.

 

[Veldel]

If I lived or planned to live there I'd buy it fuck it's history the past is the past and happened long ago no need to drag it on.

 

[Cowabungaa]

snip

The problem is that it perpetuates a frame of mind that is, well, frankly quite primitive and at the very least extremely unproductive to any society.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

snip

The problem is that it perpetuates a frame of mind that is, well, frankly quite primitive and at the very least extremely unproductive to any society.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. If he or someone in his family were still alive and in possession of these assets, that would be different. As it is, they're getting rid of an unoccupied burden, indeed, with the intent of catharsis.

 

[Cowabungaa]

snip

The problem is that it perpetuates a frame of mind that is, well, frankly quite primitive and at the very least extremely unproductive to any society.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. If he or someone in his family were still alive and in possession of these assets, that would be different. As it is, they're getting rid of an unoccupied burden, indeed, with the intent of catharsis.

Oh I'm not questioning why they do it or anything, just that what they do fundamentally doesn't work in the long run. It really pains me to see such an influential nation as the US embroiled in frankly tribal ways of thinking compared to other Western nations (although it's making a return everywhere, with the rise of right-wing populism here in Europe for instance).

This little thing is, of course, just a tiny and relatively harmless little thing in the end. It's nothing compared to the issues with your police force for instance. It won't matter much what happens to this house. But it is another 'symptom' as it were of a bigger picture that in the long run is quite problematic, not just for your nation but for the world at large.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

Oh I'm not questioning why they do it or anything, just that what they do fundamentally doesn't work in the long run. It really pains me to see such an influential nation as the US embroiled in frankly tribal ways of thinking compared to other Western nations (although it's making a return everywhere, with the rise of right-wing populism here in Europe for instance).

I agree that revenge generally isn't a good thing. I'm against the death penalty and am for reformation over incarceration, for example. I just find in this context that their actions make sense and don't hurt anyone.

This little thing is, of course, just a tiny and relatively harmless little thing in the end. It's nothing compared to the issues with your police force for instance. It won't matter much what happens to this house. But it is another 'symptom' as it were of a bigger picture that in the long run is quite problematic, not just for your nation but for the world at large.

I'm Canadian, eh?

 

[laggyteabag]

Whats the point? It's a bad memory, sure, but you cant exactly just go around demolishing and rebuilding a location every time someone gets shot. Destroy a house? Fine, whatever, but demolish a perfectly fine school just to rebuild it? It it a very bad, and very tragic event and memory for many, but this is just a waste of time and money. Both would probably be better used to help those affected by the tragedy, instead of wasting it in a futile attempt to gloss over the past.