Elementry School Shooting. Kids killed. Shooter dead.

[carracer]

In all of the videos I've seen of the shooters brother he is being led around in handcuffs.
Why?

The shooter stole his brothers ID to purchase the weapons and still had it on him when he committed the attrosities.

Which brings up another point... ABC News kept reporting that the guns had been legally purchased, when in fact, they were not.

 

[HankT]

A reasonable analysis at this point

At the risk of forming an opinion on incomplete info, this is shaping up to be another incident involving a troubled young man who was exhibiting increasing evidence of an impending psycotic break, as has been the case in many of these massacres. I don't see how anyone could have forseen this, other than perhaps his mom.

Seems like good analysis, based on the info available so far. One analyst here, has posited that the shooter's medication was at fault, since it " did not prevent" the shooting.

Also, the commenter suggested that the shooter wasn't totally at fault as the mother may have had "a destructive personality who pushed an unstable person too far."

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...mentary-school-12-14-12&p=1866449#post1866449

Interesting ideas, those. But I don't see how we can blame the medication (the shooter was responsible for his own mind and actions; drugs are not ordinarily infused with any guarantee that the ingester will not kill anyone). Similarly, I don't see how the shooter could reduce or eliminate his responsibility because of a mother who may have "pushed" him "too far." Furthermore, if the mother did actually have "a destructive personality," how does that reconcile with the fact that the three guns (Sig, Glock, Bushmaster) the shooter brought to the school were all owned by the mother?

I don't blame the mother. I don't blame the drugs.

I don't blame the guns. I don't blame the school.

I blame the gun/man system. It's clear that the messed up human+the guns+weak security+ideation nurturing all converged to equal the most traumatic civilian gun massacre of our time. I'm still shaken by the monumental intensity of the murdering. In a way, I don't believe it happened. I don't want to accept it. It's too horrible. May God's grace be granted to the families of those little kids and the others who were killed, so that they can somehow, someday accept what happened.


They're going to release the names of the deceased later today. That will be a horrifying event, since they'll probably include ages. The deaths will be unambiguously personified.

 

[marshaul]

I don't blame the mother. I don't blame the drugs.

I don't blame the guns. I don't blame the school.

I blame the gun/man system.

Uh huh. What about the gun/man/mother/school/medication system, then?

 

[HankT]

Uh huh. What about the gun/man/mother/school/medication system, then?

Good point. Sure, that's another potentially usable look at it. Complicated model, but it is another system level and could be used. I mentioned something similar in another post.


gun/man/home environment/gun community/ system.


Sometimes gun communities include young guys who wanna wanna carry, and the community encourages and informs them. Reminds me of the 19 year old member we had here a few years ago. Anty, he went by. 19. Enthusiastic. Encouraged to carry. Did. Lots of friends in the gun community. Talked guns/carry all the time.

Killed a guy in a drug deal. Remember him? Still in prison, last I heard.

Any community that is a shaping part of one's life could be part of a system.

The system models get real complicated the more factors one puts in. It seems best to me to call it a man/gun system and then subsume the environmental stuff into the "man" portion of the sytem. But I'd be open to changing that maybe.

Good to see ya again, marshaul.

 

[HankT]

dupli post, sorry.

 

[marshaul]

Good point. Sure, that's another potentially usable look at it. Complicated model, but it is another system level and could be used. I mentioned something similar in another post.


Another conceptualization is the gun/man/mother/gun community/medication system.

Sometimes gun communities include young guys who wanna wanna carry, and the community encourages and informs them. Reminds me of the 19 year old member we had here a few years ago. Anty, he went by. 19. Enthusiastic. Encouraged to carry. Did. Lots of friends in the gun community. Talked guns/carry all the time.

Killed a guy in a drug deal. Remember him? Still in prison, last I heard.

Any community that is a shaping part of one's life could be part of a system.

The system models get real complicated the more factors one puts in. It seems best to me to call it a man/gun system and then subsume the environmental stuff into the "man" portion of the sytem. But I'd be open to changing that maybe.

Good to see ya again, marshaul.

I also recall (for the benefit of new members), that Anty, having killed only in self-defense, and was an innocent victim of the war on drugs – specifically Louisiana's morally bankrupt prohibition of self-defense for those "involved in" "drug transactions". I find it hard to blame anybody other than the government of Louisiana for that tragedy – the only tragedy there being Anty's incarceration for behavior completely within his right. The legislators who passed such a law, the LEOs and prosecutors who enforce it, the judges who sustain it, and juries who convict for its violation, are the only wrongdoers in Anty's case – oh, and the guy who tried to rob Anty at riflepoint.

 

[Lasjayhawk]

Is it just me, or have we raised a generation of sociopaths?

We mollycoddle a generation, make it child abuse to discipline our children , and feed them a stream of violent video games. Then when they become mass murders we blame the weapon. :uhoh:

In 2010 there was 8,775 deaths by firearms. in 2011 there was 32,367 deaths by automobile. Best estimate I can make is there is one firearm for every automobile in the USA (about 250,000,000) Yet I have NEVER heard one person say the founding fathers could never have imagined an automobile and all the deaths they could cause and demand we go back to the horse and buggy.

 

[KYGlockster]

You missed my point. I'm just saying we don't need to make this about our rights, right now. Let the national outrage diminish.

I don't think anyone is making it about rights at this moment.

What we are making it about is common sense, which isn't too common in an anti-gunner! If people at the school had been armed and WILLING to defend these children we wouldn't have lost 20 children -- nowhere close!

We need to stop allowing the anti-gun groups to establish these gun-free zones because they are killing people!

 

[HankT]

The shooter used the AR?

I just heard a radio news report. Said the children had each been shot 3 to 11 times.
The "primary weapon used was a rifle."

I don't see any reason why Obama wouldn't announce on Monday a proposal to reinstate the AWB. Maybe the NRA/GOA can save us. But I doubt it.

 

[davidmcbeth]

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208344

Now they say he had 4 handguns, not 2 ... etc

Hey, he had an atom bomb !

I don't think we'll ever know the facts ... just whatever "facts" the government wants to give us ... there will not be any trial to review the facts.

Lets face it ... the government cannot protect us ... here is a tragedy that occurred in what should be and was a most sensitive and secure area that the government can provide ...

 

[Lasjayhawk]

Just came across this on the internets:

 

[KYGlockster]

Is it just me, or have we raised a generation of sociopaths?

We mollycoddle a generation, make it child abuse to discipline our children , and feed them a stream of violent video games. Then when they become mass murders we blame the weapon. :uhoh:

In 2010 there was 8,775 deaths by firearms. in 2011 there was 32,367 deaths by automobile. Best estimate I can make is there is one firearm for every automobile in the USA (about 250,000,000) Yet I have NEVER heard one person say the founding fathers could never have imagined an automobile and all the deaths they could cause and demand we go back to the horse and buggy.

You are right, we have raised a generation of sociopaths. However I do not believe one can blame ONLY the film industry and gaming industry.

I grew up watching all sorts of violent movies and playing some violent video games and I am doing just fine, as are my children.

The main problem lies with the parents. If a parent is not the main influence in a child's life, then there will be problems.

There have been studies conducted regarding abortion and crime rates and they have come to the conclusion in many of these studies that the crime rate has steadily dropped in part because of Roe v. Wade. They contend that women that have an abortion would not have properly cared for and raised their children (which would lead to criminal tendencies), and that the absence of that child leads to a decrease in the future crime rate. NOT THAT I AGREE WITH ABORTION, but the studies are insightful and interesting.

As for firearms in the hands of private citizens, the NRA estimated at the end of 2011 that there were 300,000,000. As of 2009 there were 310,000,000 non-military firearms in America, so I would contend that the NRA's estimate is quite low. After we take into account the record year we have had this year for the sale of firearms, I would venture to guess there are 350,000,000 +/- non-military firearms in America. There are certainly MORE firearms than there are automobiles, and automobiles take MANY more lives than firearms, especially when you add D.U.I. related accidents to the total.

Our violent crime rate continues to drop, as does accidental/intentional firearm deaths. This country is becoming a much SAFER place to live, but listening to the gun-control minions one would believe just the opposite.

Here is an interesting piece from CNN that gives a vast reference of firearm information in America:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/09/politics/btn-guns-in-america/index.html

 

[KYGlockster]

I just heard a radio news report. Said the children had each been shot 3 to 11 times.
The "primary weapon used was a rifle."

I don't see any reason why Obama wouldn't announce on Monday a proposal to reinstate the AWB. Maybe the NRA/GOA can save us. But I doubt it.

Why would he re-instate an AWB when the first one was useless? Why would he re-instate an AWB when the majority of firearms that would be restricted are only used in less than 3% of crime? Why would he re-instate an AWB when it will do NOTHING to lower the crime rate, but will certainly help to raise that rate?

You seem to support such a notion, which is absurd. Am I wrong in this observation? You have spoke about re-instating an AWB numerous times throughout this forum, and it is a ridiculous assertion.

Here is the only reason he would re-instate (attempt I should say) an AWB: his biased agenda and the liberal assertion that "no good tragedy should go to WASTE." It is very sad indeed that the liberal perspective is to work on the raw emotion of individual's to get their agenda passed into law. They care nothing about the incident, just that it will give them better chances to get their way, which is insidious!

An AWB is a ridiculous idea, and the claims that it would MAGICALLY stop these tragic instances are baseless!

 

[KYGlockster]

I agree that the MGGLGB (more guns good, less guns bad) argument is impossible to sell. It is a flawed concept, impossible to effectively implement.

The MGGLGB philosophy is as deficient as the so-called gun free zone concept. They're both very unrealistic and cannot be fully implemented.

Gun massacres by both law abiding citizens (before the gun incident) and criminals seem to be increasing, at least in intensity. A gun massacre of 20 defenseless little children is the worst carnage that I have ever heard of other than maybe the Dunblane massacre and the Virginia Tech shootup.

The "more guns equal less crime" is very easy for one to comprehend if one only has an open-mind and studies the FACTS. Gun ownership is at an all time high, as are the amount of firearms in this country. The right to carry in this country is less restricted now than it has been over the last 100 years, and violent crime is at a 50 year low. Study the crime rates from the late 80s and early 90s (which is when most right to carry laws went into effect) to now and there is a correlation.

As for a law-abiding citizen committing such a massacre, I would have to question the logic behind such an assumption. One cannot be a law-abiding citizen (before or after) if they have committed mas murder. If one commits murder then obviously they are NOT a law-abider, regardless of their past. Sure, maybe they hadn't violated the law until the massacre (not sure if that is the case here), but it is impossible to be a law-abiding citizen if you had intentions to murder people and carried out the murders. You are only a law-abiding citizen if you obey the law throughout your life; once you violate the law -- especially a mala in se statute -- you are no longer a law-abiding citizen, nor can you be considered one before or after the act. One could assume that you appeared to obey the law before the incident, but it would be hard to call one a law-abiding citizen. If this boy committed murder, one would have to assume that he has violated the law throughout life, but was lucky enough to not get caught.

 

[MKEgal]

The idea that more guns make us safer isn't going to fly with most Americans after these kinds of incidents.

The problem isn't that there was a gun present, the problem is that there was only one gun present, in the hands of a murderer.

I don't know what I, as a gun owner/enthusiast, can do or say to persuade folks that guns don't kill people when 18 children die.

Gun shows. The guns don't jump up & kill people there.

We need to honor these children by repealing the FGFSZ!

AMEN!!!

Our government does not believe law-abiding citizens should be allowed to carry in a K-12 school

Clarify your statement.
The federal "GF"SZ act says that anyone licensed by the state in which the school sits may carry on the property & in the building(s). Certain states made their own laws saying that only on-duty LEO are allowed self-defense tools.

I'm just saying we don't need to make this about our rights, right now.

And we'll be behind again, fighting to regain momentum we shouldn't have given up.
We need to overwhelm the phone lines & email accounts of all of our elected representatives to get ALL the "GF"SZ laws repealed, or at the very least amended so that anyone with a license (from any state) may carry anywhere, in any school.

ABC News kept reporting that the guns had been legally purchased, when in fact, they were not.

They were "registered" to the mother. I'd say that meant they were legal.

 

[Citizen]

SNIP Seems like good analysis, based on the info available so far. One analyst here, has posited that the shooter's medication was at fault, since it " did not prevent" the shooting.

Also, the commenter suggested that the shooter wasn't totally at fault as the mother may have had "a destructive personality who pushed an unstable person too far."

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...mentary-school-12-14-12&p=1866449#post1866449

Interesting ideas, those. But I don't see how we can blame the medication (the shooter was responsible for his own mind and actions; drugs are not ordinarily infused with any guarantee that the ingester will not kill anyone). Similarly, I don't see how the shooter could reduce or eliminate his responsibility because of a mother who may have "pushed" him "too far." Furthermore, if the mother did actually have "a destructive personality," how does that reconcile with the fact that the three guns (Sig, Glock, Bushmaster) the shooter brought to the school were all owned by the mother?

Readers,

HankT is up to his old tricks. In this case, carefully calibrated needling.

I am the commenter to whom he is referring in the quote above. If you read my post in the thread he links, you will not see me making a suggestion that the drugs or mom were at fault. The best one can honestly take away from my comments in that other thread are that mom or drugs may have contributed. Way different from at fault. In the post just above, having created the strawman argument about fault, he then argues with it.

He's smart enough to know better.

You don't think he's trying to needle me? Ask yourself whether he could have made that entire post without referencing me? Or whether he needed to reference me at all in order to respond to the other guy? Or whether he needed to make a strawman argument about something I wrote in order to respond to the other poster in this thread?

HankT has an extensive history here of stirring up trouble. To the point that it is not implausible that he derives personal pleasure from it. Don't fall for it, guys. If you feel compelled to argue with something he wrote, or argue with someone else over something he started---don't. He wants it.



HankT,

Knock it off. I have no patience for your slimy, covert tactics. Your tactics and methods get no traction on people who know about them and you. If you want me to follow you to every post you make to warn people, I will.

 

[Motofixxer]

Some actual stats on school shootings, and a little entertaining too.

[video=youtube;1L0vxIIIUCg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L0vxIIIUCg&feature=em-uploademail[/video]

 

[marshaul]

Our violent crime rate continues to drop, as does accidental/intentional firearm deaths. This country is becoming a much SAFER place to live, but listening to the gun-control minions one would believe just the opposite.

This. There is no "generation of sociopaths". No rising threat of violent demise.

Quite the contrary.

In the same way that modern media generates trends which inspire behavior and homogenize culture at a national level in the sane, it has done with the psychotic. That is to say, all the media hype inspires the never-ending stream of copy-cats. That's the only difference. There have always been sociopaths lurking in our midst. Unfortunately, the need for a free press (one of those pesky "rights" things) renders this issue intractable.

Truly effective gun control is obviously, even forgetting those pesky "rights", beyond the power of government here in the real world.

Not sure what that leaves. Spend less money on overseas interventionism and the "war on drugs" and restricting and regulating every activity under the sun, and redirect some of those savings to mental health research and provision? Accept that America is safer today than it's ever been, and that you and your loved ones have a lesser chance of suffering a violent end than they would have anywhere on Earth at any point in history, and call it a win?

 

[KWP]

Look at the stats!

I don't understand why the action of a nut job (0.000000327868% of the population) should justify taking away a fundamental right to an entire nation?

Let's castrate all males as they reach puberty then, to finally put an end to rapes.
(I guess a chastity belt would also do. You would need to apply for a permit if you want the key. We could call this permit: CCW permit. Nudist are allowed to OC though).

Similarly, most deadly road accidents are caused by drunk drivers. Let's ban alcohol.
Only eggnog would be allowed, but only during Christmas.

Seriously:

Look at stats of countries that ban or heavily regulate firearms: homicides by firearm and average number of (legal) firearms per citizen is unrelated.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

In Europe, the country with the highest number of guns in civilian hands - Finland (not Switzerland: technically most firearms are owned by army reservists, not civilians) - which happens to be one with the most liberal laws towards firearms, has the lowest murders by firearm in Europe. Explain that...

Also, the only country in Europe which is a "shall issue" policy for CCW permits is the Czech Republic. It has only slightly more murders by firearm than England, where handguns, and most rifles, are totally banned and the 8th lowest rate in the EU.

I believe in the US it should be possible to find similar stats to argue (with facts) that states that restrict firearms have no better rates than those that allow constitutional carry.

In fact, I recall reading stats showing that murders by firearms have decreased by almost half during the last 20 years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Homoffendersbyage.svg). Over the same periods, most states introduced shall issue provisions in their statutes (http://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php).



Why is that?

Oh, wait. Crimes are mostly committed by those who own guns illegally!!

 

[davidmcbeth]

I don't understand why the action of a nut job (0.000000327868% of the population) should justify taking away a fundamental right to an entire nation?

That's because you know it doesn't....our right is not tied to loonies who abuse it ... if so, 1/2 the nation would be in prison for voting for Obamalama because this display of stupidity indicates a loss in mental faculties.