Jonesboro Murderer is free - should he be allowed to own a gun?

Status
Not open for further replies.

rock jock

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
3,008
Location
In the moment
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - A teenager who helped shoot and kill five people during a school yard rampage at his middle school reached his 21st birthday Thursday and was expected to walk out of a federal detention center.

Federal authorities would not confirm Mitchell Johnson's release, saying privacy laws prevented them from commenting because Johnson was a minor when he and another boy gunned down four classmates and a teacher behind Jonesboro Westside Middle School.

Because of a since-closed loophole in Arkansas' juvenile justice system, the state had no way to hold Johnson and Andrew Golden beyond their 18th birthdays. Federal prosecutors used weapons laws to keep the boys locked up until age 21.

State Rep. Dustin McDaniel, who represents the northeastern Arkansas town, said Thursday that Johnson's expected release was a painful reminder of the violence.

"This young man should not be walking free today, but there was nothing at the time under the law to allow for any other scenario," said McDaniel, who is running for attorney general as a Democrat.

In the Arkansas court system, Johnson emerges with no criminal record after a juvenile court judge branded him a delinquent. He will not have to check in with a probation officer, deputy prosecutor Mike Walden said.

Gretchen Woodard has said that her son will not return to Arkansas when he is released from prison in Memphis, Tenn. She said he wants to become a minister and hinted he will move at least a day's drive from Jonesboro and enroll in college.

On March 24, 1998, Johnson, then 13, and Golden, then 11, stole high-powered rifles from Golden's grandfather. Dressed in camouflage, they waited in the woods behind the school until the lunch hour, when Golden ran into a hallway to trigger a fire alarm.

As classmates and teachers filed out of the buildings, Johnson and Golden opened fire. Children ducked or scrambled while teachers tried to herd pupils back into the building. Four students and Shannon Wright, an English teacher, were killed; 10 others were injured.

Johnson, on his 14th birthday, admitted in court that he took part in the slayings and offered an apology.

"I really thought that no one would actually be hurt. I thought we would just shoot over everyone's head. When the shooting started, we were not shooting at anybody or any group of people in particular," he said.

Jeannie Williams, Wright's mother, said it was wrong for Johnson to walk free because of the grief he caused.

"We just hate to see him released because he did such a bad thing," Williams told The Jonesboro Sun newspaper. "I've been dreading this day for a long time. We'll never be the same, and he'll go on with his life."

The Jonesboro shootings came amid a number of school yard assaults in which teenagers attacked their classmates. Thirteen died, along with two shooters, at Columbine, Colo., a year after Jonesboro. Luke Woodham killed two students in Pearl, Miss., in October 1997 after killing his mother, and Kip Kinkel killed two teenagers and wounded more than 20 at Springfield, Ore., after killing his parents in May 1998.

Woodham is in prison for life; Kinkel is serving nearly 112 years.
I am just wondering the how 2A purists feel about this guy, who murdered four little girls and a teacher, enjoying the same legal RKBA as you and I now that he is out. Would you have any qualms about him visiting your local gun shop?
 
He should NOT be allowed to possess firearms.

He should be in jail for another 50 years but, obviously that isn't going to happen.

That said, if he walked into a gunshop that I owned, I would not sell him a firearm. I would make him leave.
 
My understanding is that since he doesn't have a felony record, and is now 21, he will be allowed to own firearms. I would hope that learning from his experience with firearms and the consequences of misusing them, that he would not want to own a firearm. I would suspect that he is aware that there are many people out there wanting him to go away for life, so he, assuming he was prudent, would avoid anything that be too contraversial. That said, if it were legal for him to purchase a firearm, I would not be against it, after all there are probably a bunch of people who would be glad to shed his blood, and he has a right to self-defense as well. I wouldn't want to be the one that sold it to him though, and if I owned a gun shop, he wouldn't have one of mine. Let's hope he doesn't try, because if he did, imagine the public relations fiasco: "Arkansas Killer Rearms!!" and the hue and cry for new gun restrictions. ouch!!!
Kj
 
Let's see, laws he has already broken; 1. Possession of a firearm by person under 18, 2. Possession of a firearm on school property. 3. Conspiracy to commit homicide, 4. Homicide (multiple) Whatever the legal answer is, do you think the "law" will prevent him from obtaining one if he wants it?
 
Whatever the legal answer is, do you think the "law" will prevent him from obtaining one if he wants it?
No, it is simply a matter of principle. I don't think he should be legally allowed to own a gun (or even breath for that matter). And, if he is found with a gun, I want LE to have the ability to arrest his worthless backside and throw him in jail.
 
Gun rights and voting rights for this dirtbag are a moot point.

He never should have been released. You do an adult crime, you do adult time. If a 19 year old would get a dirtnap for it, then so should anyone under 18.

The criminal rights lobby got this murderer off easy with their liberal laws and now they are crying about the more than adequate gun laws.
 
And, if he is found with a gun, I want LE to have the ability to arrest his worthless backside and throw him in jail.
I disagree. There are plenty of other reasons he should be in jail. He has not yet paid his debt to society (IMHO).

I agree with Boofus.
 
No, it is simply a matter of principle. I don't think he should be legally allowed to own a gun (or even breath for that matter).
As a matter of principle, he should still be behind bars. So if you're asking for my answer based on principles, then the question is meaningless, because there's no excuse for him being out of prison. My answer is mu. As a practical matter, though, society has decided he's paid his debt, so yes, he should be allowed to own guns. I, personally, don't want him to have guns, but that's also true of a lot of people I know who haven't done anything wrong, and I wouldn't dream of denying them their RKBA.

And, if he is found with a gun, I want LE to have the ability to arrest his worthless backside and throw him in jail.
This, however, isn't a good argument even in principle. Just because you feel someone wasn't punished enough for a crime he did commit doesn't mean it's legitimate to invent crimes for him so we can put him away again.
 
Well, he says he wants to be a minister. Maybe he does, and maybe he truly is reformed. The Bible teaches that you will be judged in the manner you judge others. Therefore if you are unwilling to forgive him, God will then not forgive you your sins when you some day stand before him.

Do I think the way the law works in this instance is right? Probably not. At the very least he should probably be on probation for a certain amount of time. Maybe he shouldn't be allowed guns, I don't know. If you are asking do I think its possible for someone to repent and be reformed? Yes, I do. Its the basis of Christianity and, once upon our time, of our legal system--in fact, and not just in words. If thats not the case, perhaps it would be better to just execute all criminals who commit a felony, rather than pretend they will be able to rejoin society some day.

If they really thought this guy was a menace, they don't need to let him roam free just because they have to release him from prison--the state could keep him in a mental insitution indefinitely. They can take anybody and put them in a mental insitution for 72 hours of observation, and then after that just sort of keep you indefinitely if they want to. If they are letting him loose, they must not be properly convinced he is a further threat.

There have been lots of instances in history where somebody did something fairly heinous as a youth but then reformed and lived a worthwhile life. If I am remembering correctly, even in the case of the Crime of the Century, a somewhat analagous situation perhaps, this was the case? Didn't Leopold eventually get out and become a dr? Seems like I remember something to that effect.
 
Here's the thing. A free man has a right to keep and bear arms, because a free man has a right to his life, and therefore a right to protect his life with whatever means are reasonable and available. Now, it is a separate question entirely whether or not he should be a free man. When you commit murder, you have, in justice, forfeited any reasonable expectation of continued liberty in all things, and belong in jail for the rest of your life, or dead at the end of a rope.
 
I question whether he should be allowed out of prison at all, but definitely not so damn soon! Just because he happened to be under 18 at the time doesn't mean he didn't know what he was doing.
 
I have qualms about a lot of people owning guns - heck, everybody but me, in fact... I'm the only one that I trust :p

Really, the chances of this kid doing something like that again are likely pretty low - and if he does, then he will just steal the gun(s) like he did the first time. :rolleyes:

I am much more concerned about the organized crime of the government than I am about any freelancers. :uhoh:
 
I agree if society has deemed his debt paid...

I would also wonder whether he would even want to touch a gun as at the ver least would increase scrutiny of him. I doubt he would want one... But, having said that, if he is allowed then we cannot deny him. To do so would help the cause of the very people we try and fight on a daily basis. Just remember he ain't in school anymore. If he tries those shenanigans again his carcass will be lying in a ditch to be sure. He aint in the "safety" of school anymore. He's now out on the streets with citizens, who have chosen to do their civic duty and ensure the safety of theirs and those around. (people like the population of this very site.- and a nice friendly note to that effect might be a good deterrent) :evil:
 
Question answered in the Constitution...

Just because we don't like the outcome of the situation does not mean we can seek revenge. The system failed on this one and that is that. This human vermin now has ALL rights that you and I have. To deny him the 2A would be unConstitutional. I would still like to see the bastich drawn and quartered.
 
His debt hasn't been paid. The law that let him out of jail is messed up. He should be in prison until he's old or dead. A mass murderer is not a juvenile delinquent. He should never own a gun.

He's one of those guys who fell through some crack in the legal system. Like if there's a serial killer, the police go into his house and find all kinds of evidence, but the police didn't have a correct warrant or something and so all the evidence is thrown out, and the serial killer gets to walk and there's nothing anyone can do about it within the law. It sounds like in this case there is a loophole in the law. Really, there should be a possibility of murderers of any age being tried as adults. It sounds like that may not have been possible under that state law. 13 and 11 year old boys may not have the maturity of adults but they know that killing is wrong with a capital W. This guy is not a reformed adult now. He will never be reformed. I bet that before his time here is over he will murder again.

People who commit felonies should have to go through a reasonable review process to own a gun. The review should take into account many factors, including the nature of the crime. For a crime like unprovoked murder, that should eternally bar someone from access to guns.
 
I'm sure the good folks of Jonesboro will take care of the problem in good time, without spooking the horses.............. :evil:

Yanus
 
Well, Sara Brady and Michael Barnes don't think so, FWIW ;)

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=51560
Brady Campaign: Jonesboro Killer, Leaving Prison Tomorrow, Will Be Free to Buy Firearms

8/10/2005 3:09:00 PM

To: National Desk

Contact: Peter Hamm of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 202-898-0792

MEMPHIS, Tenn., Aug. 10 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following was released today by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence:

You kill five people in cold blood, shocking an entire nation. You go to prison. Seven years later, you get out, and you are free to buy all the guns you want.

What a country.

Mitchell Johnson, who as a 13-year-old on March 24, 1998 joined with 11-year-old Andrew Golden to plan and execute the attack at Jonesboro, Arkansas' Westside Middle School that resulted in the death of four students and a teacher and the wounding of 10 others, pleaded guilty to murder. Under Arkansas law, he could only be imprisoned until he turned 21, which is tomorrow, when he will leave a Memphis, Tenn., detention center. Under Arkansas law, he is also not a prohibited purchaser of firearms because he was convicted of the murders as a minor.

"This individual and his accomplice planned their crime. They lured their victims outside with a false fire alarm, and then they slaughtered them. And now, Mr. Johnson is an adult, and he can legally purchase a firearm," said Michael Barnes, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

"I hope this young man has changed, and that he is not a threat to others. But this is a textbook case of an individual who should be deemed by society as forever barred from the privilege of owning a gun," Barnes said. "The fact that he will be legally allowed to own one is an absolute embarrassment in our society."

---

As the nation's largest, non-partisan, grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence, the Brady Campaign, working with its dedicated network of Million Mom March Chapters, is devoted to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in our communities.
 
So, this leads me to ask, if someone commits a crime, gets caught, is sentenced to prison of X amount of years, serves his time, and then is released, should he still be punished for that crime via a criminal record?

No where do the courts say, you are sentenced to 20 years in prison, after you get out, you will then be punished by removal of some of constitutional rights for the rest of your life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top