Posted on 04/02/2014 11:30:47 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Some Newtown residents are calling for the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter's home to be torn down and replaced with a park or nature preserve, according to a new community survey.
The Newtown-Sandy Hook Community Foundation received more than 1,600 responses to the survey it released Monday on town residents' unmet needs in the wake of the December 2012 shootings. The foundation has been deciding how to distribute more than $11 million in donations made in response to the shootings, which left 20 first-graders and six educators dead.
While most of the survey responses said money for mental health counseling and other family expenses are top priorities, a small percentage of community members mentioned funds to buy and tear down Adam Lanza's home, said Jennifer Barahona, the foundation's executive director. She said several people who live near the Lanza house said in the survey that it should be razed.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Gary Stein: Time to make George Zimmerman disappear
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3139892/posts
It isn't public property.
What does the house have to do with the massacre? It is an inanimate object. Would they want to tear it down if a saint lived there?
Especially if a saint lived there. There is no room for good in the den of the evil.
That’s not a bad idea — turn it into a park — the neighbors would love it except for all the traffic it might bring to the neighborhood.
I agree....absolutely.
Columbine HS still exists. VA Tech still exists. Dealey Plaza still exists. Aurora Theater still exists. Washington Navy Yard still exists. Etc. Just saying.
I guess they could always buy the house and then tear it down.
“Would they want to tear it down if a saint lived there?”
Yeah, probably! Saints are also on the “not protected any more” list. Now if it were a former whorehouse or a crack den, they would probably turn it into an attraction.
BURN THE WITCHES!!!
Turn it into a museum as a reminder of what happens when crazy democrats become unhinged.
the decision to raze or not to raze belongs to the owners. if the owners want to raze the joint, then fine. if they went to keep/sell or whatever, that is their right.
if you want to raze someone else’s joint, then buy it and have at it. else show the owners the same respect you would want them to show you.
I think the spook community saw this as an opportunity, and put a plan into play that had been in the works for a long time.
I think Newtown was one of the "under the radar" gun control initiatives Ubama talked about.
If the S.O.B.’s want to build the park there they should pay to purchase the property from the estate of the owner.
As a citizen of Connecticut I don’t want to spend one more dime on Newtown.They have spent far too much already on a coverup of the shooting site just to protect the state and local police.
Sandy Hook School was razed; the house wasn’t the site of the shooting. I don’t follow the thought/emotion of the townspeople. If it came on the market for $10, I’d buy it.
If she had a Will, it goes to that person or persons, however she set it up. If she had no Will, it goes to the state to administer the estate, giving the estate to the next of kin. That house goes to the next of kin and no one can tear it down unless the owner agrees to sell it.
I don’t remember if she had another child or children but I’m thinking he had a brother. He should inherit the house.
And salt the ground so that it may be forever barren?
What does the house have to do with the massacre?
_______________________________________
The massacre began there. Lanza’s mother.
The town probably receives property tax money from it from somewhere. They tear it down it’ll cost a few million to build a park and the revenue from it will be gone. Which horn of the dilemma ????
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.