"Guns used in Connecticut shooting purchased legally," blared the New Jersey Star-Ledger. That's an odd way to describe stolen property. After a burglar's arrest, does the media rush to point out the items he stole were purchased legally by his victim?

The reality is, the Sandy Brook shooter was statutorily prohibited from purchasing or possessing a handgun. In addition, he reportedly attempted to purchase a long gun, and was denied. And the "assault weapons" ban liberals are so fervent to reinstate, it was already on the books in both Connecticut and New Jersey.

The shooter did not have legal access to these firearms. He stole them after murdering his own mother. To suggest otherwise is—at best—ignorant, but more likely intentionally deceptive.