wbm
Member
Nothing else to say other than that.
Michigan School Shooting
- Thread starter daverich4
- Start date
- Status
Nothing else to say other than that.
So what do you and Alexànder propose? A law that demands every picture of you that was ever taken, to be judged and approved by a bureaucrat before you can exercise any gun right?
Time to put feelings and biases aside. There is no perfect safe society. And judging people by their booking photos?...come on man.
Gus Chiggins
Member
Edit....
Cruz had been EXPELLED from school. That is about as firm as the school can be. He had no longer been a student there for some time before he walked back onto the campus and started shooting kids. The failure was on the part of LE who didn't take warning signs seriously enough. The FBI got a tip that he was planning something 5 weeks prior. There were warning signs well in advance and time to react.
The situation is Michigan is much different. Action was taken by the school the same day that warning signs of any issue were known. There were less than 24 hours before any signs of a problem were known and the shooting started. In retrospect I'm sure there are a lot of "what if's". But there was little time to react in this case.
And the parents were especially negligent. Often when these things happen I'm sympathetic to the parents of the shooter. But I'm having a hard time finding any sympathy for these 2. There should be consequences but based on what I'm reading about Michigan law they may have a hard time proving a criminal case. They will face serious civil suits though.
America has always been a "rough" society.
But something has gone terribly.. terribly... wrong.
upptick
Member
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2020
- Messages
- 281
Well, if you're going to start charging third parties for someone`s crime particularly when that third party had knowledge of a threat and failed to take appropriate action, I'd say in addition to the parents in this case the school administrators are likely targets. I heard the sheriff say that he had a deputy at the school who was on site and not notified of the threat and I think the prosecutor said something about a Michigan law that requires reporting of threats to the police. At the very least there would seem to be civil liability for the school district here.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,089
Regardless of what term is used, it would subjectively be connected by some as 'Anti-Gun". Red flags have been used as a symbol of danger ahead for as long as I can remember and I'm going on my 7th decade on this rock circling the sun. This shooting is a prime example of what happens when those danger signs, regardless of what you want to call them are ignored. Like coming up with a better term, the solution of how to stop these kind of tragedies eludes those who oppose removing firearms from the hands of those folks that display these dangerous signs.
While I work at a High School and I support the use of CWC by select staff, I resent the inferring that schools make students "easy" targets. We spend many days each year training staff and students what to do in the event of an active shooter or other violent intruder. We have assemblies and classes to teach students how to identify "danger signs" and how to report them, regardless of how trivial they seem. We have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in the last two decades installing security cameras and locked doors. While CWC by staff may reduce the number of victims, it is not going to stop school shootings by students that are familiar with the buildings, the security and where students are at certain times of the day. What if the shooter had pulled his gun in the crowded cafeteria at lunch? How about in the crowded halls at dismissal or between class periods? In these instances aiming is moot, pass thru and hitting more than one student with each bullet is plausible.How does a teacher in the panic and stress, shoot and remove the threat, when there is a myriad of innocents in the way? These shootings evolve and change like the Corona Virus. The next one is different from the last, and future shooters learn from the mistakes of previous ones. In many schools, the high incidence of Corona has taken priority over the relatively minuscule risk of a active shooter. Many times due to budget restraints, school security has taken a back seat to mitigation of the risk from the virus. While arming select staff may reduce the number of victims, giving trauma training to those same staff, would probably save more lives in the long run. You do know that police step over kids bleeding to death to get to the shooter? They have to ensure they have any threat removed before EMTs can enter the building. With an arterial hit, it takes less than 4 minutes to bleed out. Takes at least that for most LEOs to get to the scene, much less neutralize the threat. Staff are already there and could stop the bleed. JMTCs.
^^^+1 to both of the above posts. Instead of just dissing those who are at least attempting to protect our children, with the same old worn out rhetoric, folks need to actively contribute and come up with realistic solutions. Otherwise it's just urinating into the wind.
lightman
Member
I don't have a proposal. I don't have any answers. And I don't think anyone should be judged by a picture. But personally the kids picture would worry me. Thats just me personally. Its not meant to be considered as a recommendation to anyone for anything.
“Well, when all is said & done, we as responsible gun owners need to address this issue and begin calling out those who we know ignore or even condone & foster the behavior that leads to these incidents.“
What does that even mean? What issue specifically? Murder by firearm? Do those that deem themselves “responsible” get to call out those they deem “irresponsible” on some type of social media? How would one even do that without proclaiming oneself “king of the world”, with all the invasive, draconian laws in place to even allow such a thing to be possible?
What does that even mean? What issue specifically? Murder by firearm? Do those that deem themselves “responsible” get to call out those they deem “irresponsible” on some type of social media? How would one even do that without proclaiming oneself “king of the world”, with all the invasive, draconian laws in place to even allow such a thing to be possible?
Coyote3855
Member
[QUOTE="armydog, post: 12133116, member: 279513"]This situation is exactly what the liberals have been praying to the heavens to bring them. This prosecutor can't even contain her glee. She's not upset at all that kids were killed in the classroom, she is just happy it was with a gun by a white kid. During the press conference she appeared as if she was in a debate trying to hammer home how horrible the opposition is. lol
All 3 are about to get KR'd in the media.
Like I have told my friends... you can't trust your kid to be around guns unsupervised no matter how good a kid you think they are. It's your damn job not to trust them. And this kid... geez. This is all just a gift to the left.[/QUOTE]
As a liberal gun owner, NRA certified instructor and life member, volunteer community service deputy, and firearms historian for a state museum, I deeply resent your statement that I or any other "liberal" would be praying for the death of children.
You are casting aspersions on the prosecutor with no evidence to support your accusations.
All 3 are about to get KR'd in the media.
Like I have told my friends... you can't trust your kid to be around guns unsupervised no matter how good a kid you think they are. It's your damn job not to trust them. And this kid... geez. This is all just a gift to the left.[/QUOTE]
As a liberal gun owner, NRA certified instructor and life member, volunteer community service deputy, and firearms historian for a state museum, I deeply resent your statement that I or any other "liberal" would be praying for the death of children.
You are casting aspersions on the prosecutor with no evidence to support your accusations.
As a liberal gun owner, NRA certified instructor and life member, volunteer community service deputy, and firearms historian for a state museum, I deeply resent your statement that I or any other "liberal" would be praying for the death of children.
You are casting aspersions on the prosecutor with no evidence to support your accusations.[/QUOTE]
Get real. Where have you been the past 20 years?
I call it it like it is. Any recent hysteria concerning gun violence, mass shootings and murdered children in the conservative media. If you have any examples then post them. Maybe you didnt hear the calls for republicans to clean up the brain matter of the kids at Sandy Hook.
Its all your party....so own it.
Geez, your party just crucified a teenager that defended himself in Wisconsin by labeling him a white supremacist and everyone he shot was white. Yeah, that is some flimsy evidence of mine. Your party is so rational. You cant make up the bizzaro land defamation and lies your party manufactures and stands by. Have you asked yourself why your party intentionally lies in order to incite violence? Your party treats mass shootings and killings of children as FUND RAISING opportunities. I see a left wing prosecutor at a press conference, I will give my opinion whether you like it or not. I'm not trying to offend you. You honestly think that liberals aren't salivating for the next mass shooting? Why do they have fundraisers emailed out, sometimes within an hour of some events, demanding more gun control and contributions. lol It's Fill In The Blank Time for them. They are WAITING for it to happen. To be more specific, the LIBERALS are waiting for this to happen. They are ready to go. So spare me your outrage, I'm one of the people that doesn't want bad things to happen.
Last edited:
Madcap_Magician
Member
Oh, Baldwin is definitely culpable, but that's nothing to do with this.
Elkins45
Member
Michigan apparently doesn’t have any sort of safe storage law. That means essentially you could tack a nail on your front porch then hang a loaded Glock from it without fear of legal consequences. It seems pretty inadequate to me that something like that can’t be treated as a crime, because that’s essentially why they did. They left a handgun and ammunition freely available to a 15 year old moron. They deserve some of this blame, and if the law doesn’t allow that blame to be placed on them then the law has some flaws that need to be fixed.
I believe the parents are at fault. What I did was highlight what the prosecutor said. For what purpose was she highlighting, during the press conference, the "woefully inadequate" gun laws in her state. I think she has an agenda. Is she really taking great pains not to offend legitimate gun owners or is she making the case for stricter gun laws? I was replying to someone when I wrote this.
My take on a stricter gun laws is that they mean nothing. If someone is stupid enough to allow their kid, especially one that has a lot of problems, access to a gun, what good is a law going to do? But hey, they can knock themselves out and come up with some storage law if they want.
AlexanderA
Member
We, as gun owners, need to be at the forefront of weeding out those who, like this kid, clearly should not have guns. It's in our enlightened self-interest to prevent incidents like this. But, I'll be the first to admit that it's not easy to design a filter that would weed out the unworthy, but not trample on the rights of the rest of us. Maybe it can't be done. But then we'd be accepting that a casualty rate of x is the price of freedom. (Honestly, it probably is. Nobody wants to state it that way.)
Woefully inadequate “safe storage” laws? Really?...
So how far down this rabbit hole does some micromanaging petty tyrant wanna go? I can see it now:
“Oh, I only mean “reasonable” safe storage laws, not anything horrible.”
Uh huh. Until safe storage means you can only keep a firearm in a safe at a local club.
Please. Knock it off. We can have safe storage laws for vehicle keys, chainsaws, and kitchen knives too.
So how far down this rabbit hole does some micromanaging petty tyrant wanna go? I can see it now:
“Oh, I only mean “reasonable” safe storage laws, not anything horrible.”
Uh huh. Until safe storage means you can only keep a firearm in a safe at a local club.
Please. Knock it off. We can have safe storage laws for vehicle keys, chainsaws, and kitchen knives too.
The PSYOPS started days ago. lol
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-...utor-calls-state-gun-laws-woefully-inadequate
QUOTE
“While we have met resistance on taking proactive measures to prevent gun violence in the past, we are asking folks to consider a change of heart and mind so the students who died at Oxford - and who have died in countless other tragedies across the country - have not died in vain,” the caucus continued.
“We have introduced commonsense gun safety legislation in the past and, in doing so, have warned about the very tragedy we now face. We are reaching across the aisle, seeking to revisit this issue so we can hopefully prevent another senseless tragedy in our schools, and must recognize the freedom to kill is not more important than the freedom to live and learn in peace,” the caucus added.
END QUOTE
You'd think they have a plan to ensure the safety of everyone if they can just get their common sense gun laws passed. But what about the law against murder? Don't they have one of those in Michigan? Isn't it illegal for a kid to take a gun to school? Maybe some "Universal" safe storage law will be the law that makes a difference.
We'll pause here, to wait for an update to the case.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
