Welcome to Gaia! ::


Quotable Informer

20,825 Points
  • Elysium's Gatekeeper 100
  • Partygoer 500
  • Frozen Sleuth 100
Officials in Newtown voted Wednesday night to tear down the home where Adam Lanza lived before he carried out the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

The vote by the Newtown Legislative Council approved a proposal by the board of selectmen to raze the 3,100-square-foot home and keep the land as open space.

First Selectwoman Pat Llodra said she expects the Lanza house will be razed once winter is over. The 2-acre property was given to the town in December by a bank that acquired it from the Lanza family.

Neighbors had been pleading with town officials to tear down the house of the mass murderer, with one resident saying it's "a constant reminder of the evil that resided there."

Inside the large yellow house with green shutters on Yogananda Street is where Lanza shot his mother to death Dec. 14, 2012, before killing 20 first-graders and six educators at nearby Sandy Hook Elementary School. He then committed suicide.

Amy DeLoughy, whose house sits across the street, wrote to the council that her children's bus stop had to be moved because it was too scary for the kids to wait near the house.

Ian and Nicole Hockley, whose 6-year-old son, Dylan, died in the shooting, have said they moved out of the neighborhood because seeing that house across the way was too painful for them.

Neighbor Dave Ackart wrote, "Not only is the property a constant reminder of the evil that resided there — those of us who walk, run, drive, ride or otherwise must pass it multiple times a day, are having a hard time moving on."

Llodra was unsure how much demolition would cost, but estimated it could be around $27,000.

Legislative Council member Phillip Carroll said a Sandy Hook fundraiser that brought in $1.2 million still has about $260,000 left. "The money for the demolition can come from this fund," he said.

Llodra has asked town attorneys to write something into the deed that will prohibit the town from profiting from any future sale or development of the land.

"Any proceeds, should the property ever be developed, would be for the benefit of the victims," she said.

The Lanza family moved from southern New Hampshire and bought the new house in 1998. It has been sitting vacant since the shooting.

Everything inside, including rugs and lighting fixtures, have been removed and incinerated so nothing could become memorabilia.

But neighbors say it has become a destination for macabre tourists "who still drive by and pause and take photos on a regular basis," Ackart wrote.


Llodra said she polled the victims' families and neighbors, and most support the plan to tear the house down. But not everyone likes the idea of leaving the space open.

DeLoughy said she would rather the property be sold and a new home built on the property.

"Leaving the property to nature would mean there is still a sense of darkness in our neighborhood," she said. "Love and light that a new family would bring would help heal some of the very deep wounds we are still tending to."

Murders inside homes lessen the value of the property.

Lord Elwrind's Queen

Dangerous Fairy

55,065 Points
  • Waffles! 25
  • Team Poison Master 250
  • Winged 100
I still say it is like running away and hiding from an evil that no longer exists. On the other hand, no one likes being reminded of crap like this.

Insularis's Waifu

Witty Phantom

I like how whenever some bad thing happens, they choose to destroy the home of the person who perpetrated the crime.
Evil exists and you need to be constantly reminded of it, you morons.
Instead of keeping the land empty, why not built a shelter or a daycare or something to make something good out of that space?

Alien Dog

17,850 Points
  • Citizen 200
  • Voter 100
  • Mark Twain 100
Loyal Assassin Jafar
I like how whenever some bad thing happens, they choose to destroy the home of the person who perpetrated the crime.
Evil exists and you need to be constantly reminded of it, you morons.
Instead of keeping the land empty, why not built a shelter or a daycare or something to make something good out of that space?


Because bad memories and negative associations are the thinking man's Indian Burial Ground, and we all know thanks to many horror movie PSAs that you don't build anything on an Indian Burial Ground.

Basically, it's all about superstition, just being justified through means that never actually bring up superstition.

Insularis's Waifu

Witty Phantom

Keltoi Samurai
Loyal Assassin Jafar
I like how whenever some bad thing happens, they choose to destroy the home of the person who perpetrated the crime.
Evil exists and you need to be constantly reminded of it, you morons.
Instead of keeping the land empty, why not built a shelter or a daycare or something to make something good out of that space?


Because bad memories and negative associations are the thinking man's Indian Burial Ground, and we all know thanks to many horror movie PSAs that you don't build anything on an Indian Burial Ground.

Basically, it's all about superstition, just being justified through means that never actually bring up superstition.

What's weird is that my high school was built on an Indian burial ground. XD

kuroreo's Waifu

Peaceful Light

27,575 Points
  • Tenacious Spirit 250
  • Perfect Attendance 400
  • Ultimate Player 200
I agree with the person at the end. Should just build a new house so that a new family can bring light to it. Having an empty lot would still be a reminder in the end. Having something completely different would bring forgetfulness faster.
destroying the evidence much




ps it's not so much that they did fake the shooting for sure, it's that we wouldn't know otherwise because these people are so ******** dishonest
and honestly that's a bigger problem, that they're capable of it

Snuggly Buddy

29,150 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Mark Twain 100
  • Conventioneer 300
Seems like a waste of what is presumably an otherwise good home.
It is roughly double the size of my 1650 sq foot home and one year newer.

IMO it would be more constructive to change the look a bit (maybe different siding and new paint?) and then use the house for some sort of "good" purpose. Or just sell the place and use the money for a good purpose. In other words - for those folks who can't seem to separate the property from the bad person who lived there and did bad things - give them something positive to associate the property with.

It seems likely to me that for those folks who can't let go of their feelings every time they pass the property, seeing the property even without the house is likely to still be an issue for them. "There's that property where the person who used to live there was so evil we had to tear down the house!"

Lonely Browser

why wait so long? i still feel like this whole thing was bs anyways, so whatever.

Ferocious Browser

I don;t see how leaving it to nature would equate to 'darkness'....but a new house and family equates to 'light'. that is kinda ******** up mentality....

could just put a playground there.
You can't escape your history more than you can escape yourself.

Lord Elwrind's Queen

Dangerous Fairy

55,065 Points
  • Waffles! 25
  • Team Poison Master 250
  • Winged 100
far_river_arms_section_vi
destroying the evidence much




ps it's not so much that they did fake the shooting for sure, it's that we wouldn't know otherwise because these people are so ******** dishonest
and honestly that's a bigger problem, that they're capable of it


Faked? Dude, not faked! I wish it was! Most of us here in Connecticut wishes it was!
But you are right about the "destroying evidence" IF the case was still being actively investigated and the scene still needed to be intact. There is still no clue as to exactly why the kid did what he did. He killed his mother while she was still in bed before he left for school (stealing her car to get there)

Lord Elwrind's Queen

Dangerous Fairy

55,065 Points
  • Waffles! 25
  • Team Poison Master 250
  • Winged 100
David2074
Seems like a waste of what is presumably an otherwise good home.
It is roughly double the size of my 1650 sq foot home and one year newer.

IMO it would be more constructive to change the look a bit (maybe different siding and new paint?) and then use the house for some sort of "good" purpose. Or just sell the place and use the money for a good purpose. In other words - for those folks who can't seem to separate the property from the bad person who lived there and did bad things - give them something positive to associate the property with.

It seems likely to me that for those folks who can't let go of their feelings every time they pass the property, seeing the property even without the house is likely to still be an issue for them. "There's that property where the person who used to live there was so evil we had to tear down the house!"


Might also be a case of not being able to sell the house to anyone because of the notorious history of it too, now that I think about it. A poster mentioned superstition.

Alien Dog

17,850 Points
  • Citizen 200
  • Voter 100
  • Mark Twain 100
Reactionary, unnecessary, and yet . . . Throughout all of this, I can't help but think that "raze" is one of those words that kinda shows how the English language was doomed, even before "literally" became it's own antonym.

I mean, it works out great, on paper . . . But when spoken? I mean, it's not it's own antonym, but it's a homophone with it's own antonym. Is that really somehow better?

Snuggly Buddy

29,150 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Mark Twain 100
  • Conventioneer 300
Nyadriel
David2074
Seems like a waste of what is presumably an otherwise good home.
It is roughly double the size of my 1650 sq foot home and one year newer.

IMO it would be more constructive to change the look a bit (maybe different siding and new paint?) and then use the house for some sort of "good" purpose. Or just sell the place and use the money for a good purpose. In other words - for those folks who can't seem to separate the property from the bad person who lived there and did bad things - give them something positive to associate the property with.

It seems likely to me that for those folks who can't let go of their feelings every time they pass the property, seeing the property even without the house is likely to still be an issue for them. "There's that property where the person who used to live there was so evil we had to tear down the house!"


Might also be a case of not being able to sell the house to anyone because of the notorious history of it too, now that I think about it. A poster mentioned superstition.


There was no mention of them trying to sell it.
Superstition might affect some people but hardly the majority of the buyer market. It would not bother me to buy a house where someone died. My concern, if any, would be whether the live neighbors would give me s**t because they could not separate a piece of property from a killer in their minds. Even if they sold it a bit below market rate that's still more profit than just bulldozing it to the ground.

I don't want to move there but if I could magically swap out that house for my current house on my property I would. It is slightly newer and nearly double the size. Well, I guess it would up my heating bill and my property taxes but I think I could deal with it.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum