Apologies if all of this has been said already, but I ain't reading through 216 comments:

That's quite a jump, assuming Liza Long is a loving mother. Her ethics in using both Michael's name and a photo of him are dubious (I appreciate your respect for your son's privacy), and her other blog entries show she is mentally disturbed herself (http://bit.ly/ZbccQJ). It sounds like her son could do with living in a different environment.

But Liza Long's story is sort of beside the point when it comes to gun violence. The whole "I am [oppressed person]" trope serves to conflate narratives by co-opting a story which is, in fact, _not_ hers, and obscures understanding of the other case at hand. While mental health policy and the culture around mental health in both the US and NZ need improving, there's no suggestion that that Adam Lanza had similar mental health issues to Michael. Moreover, treating gun violence as something only committed by people like Michael serves to further stigmatise those who have mental health issues, casting them as people prone to violence rather than (far more commonly) being victims of it. Who knows, for example, how Michael's job prospects in future may be affected by a widespread perception of him as a mass-murderer-to-be? It also gives false comfort to people who assume their son could never shoot up a school because he's not like Michael, as though gun violence is a problem of individuals that can be isolated and quarantined.