Gun Tragedy, 5th grader suicide

[corplinx]

No, but I would have felt better if the kids at Columbine had taken pills or belts to school with them. It certainly would have caused a lot less damage than guns.

They also had homemade bombs, would you have preferred more of those than guns?

 

[KelvinG]

They also had homemade bombs, would you have preferred more of those than guns?

No, oddly enough, I'm not a real fan of homemade bombs either. Call me old fashioned.

 

[Guest]

If he had taken a mouthful of pills, would we be criticizing the father for not locking up the medicine cabinet?

If he hung himself with a belt, would we criticize the dad for not locking the closet?

Unfortunatly for your analogy, those items are not designed to kill things. Guns are specifically made with that purpose.

-Who

 

[John Harrison]

My overall point is that if you have guns in the house, keep them secure beyond any degree of doubt. That doesn't infringe on anyone's rights does it.

That's an interesting point. Can you specifically define what "beyond any degree of doubt" is?

 

[Tony]

Unfortunatly for your analogy, those items are not designed to kill things. Guns are specifically made with that purpose.

Guns arent made to kill anymore than knifes are made to kill. Guns are made to shoot bullets.

 

[KelvinG]

That's an interesting point. Can you specifically define what "beyond any degree of doubt" is?

I know that it isn't hanging the key to the gun case in a blatantly obvious place like happened in this story.

I think that any storage area that is behind lock and key, or combination lock or something to that effect is a good start. I think a reasonable person can devise a reasonable storage method that isn't easy to get at. I'm afraid I can't elaborate with design plans or the most popular gun storage products on the market. It's not really an area of expertise on my part.

Now, you may counter that no matter how well you secure the guns, someone could always get at them if they really, really wanted to. Of course. Nothing is absolutely foolproof. Which is yet another reason why I would never want guns in my home.
But, if a person does have guns in their home I would hope they secure them in a way that could prevent a 12 year old kid from getting at them easily. Again, no method is foolproof. But I think that common sense can dictate what exactly "secure" means.

 

[Guest]

Guns arent made to kill anymore than knifes than knifes are made to kill. Guns are made to shoot bullets.

Butterknives, no. Hunting knives, yes. A gun is a bazillion-point-five times more lethal than a hunting knife. (p-value < .00345, so you know I am talking legit here, hehe)

Guns aren't designed to kill.. Right. I guess people just shoot those metal thingies to tap people on the shoulder or to play tag or something.

Could you give me an example besides farmer Billy (Bob gets picked on enough) shooting beer cans, road signs, or heads of lettuce, where guns aren't used for killing? I can think of several, but then I have to get back into reality and compare those times to the number of instances where guns are used for killing.

-Who

 

[Guest]

But, if a person does have guns in their home I would hope they secure them in a way that could prevent a 12 year old kid from getting at them easily. Again, no method is foolproof. But I think that common sense can dictate what exactly "secure" means.

And don't forget the dad lost the key! He lost the most important key in his posession for several days, and then when he found it, he put it up on a wall hook. It makes me wonder if this was where he always kept the key? Maybe the boy took it and hid it under the couch, or ditched it when he heard his dad coming in? Maybe the boy was going to make a copy? Who knows, but it sure wasn't secured by ANY stretch of the imagination.



-Who

 

[KelvinG]

Guns arent made to kill anymore than knifes than knifes are made to kill. Guns are made to shoot bullets.

I agree. And don't most people keep knives out of the reach of young children.
Eventually you begin to trust kids around knives because you can teach them how to use them properly and how to respect how they can be dangerous.

The same can be said of guns, of course. However, the potential for accidents with guns is greater.
Also, taking a knife to school is highly unlikely to result in a massacre.

A gun must be treated with greater respect than any other potential weapon simply because of it's potential for destruction.

I'm actually kind of surprised at the argument this has stirred. Can anyone really argue with the idea that secure storage of a firearm isn't important?

If the story that started this thread was a simple suicide I probably wouldn't have been so critical of what happened. Arguments have been posed that the kid could have killed himself in a number of different ways, and the fact that he chose to use his father's guns is irrelevant.
But, this kid went to school with the intent of using these guns on others. It's only because his friends weren't down with the plan that he ended up killing himself.

If it had been difficult, or impossible for him to access firearms, then it's possible he might have never had the idea to do something like he planned on doing.

Also, in the interests of fairness, we should also point out that school incidents like Columbine are very rare. I'm not going to start ranting on this thread that school violence from guns is out of control. It isn't. The media just siezes on any opportunity to report on such stories.

 

[John Harrison]

I know that it isn't hanging the key to the gun case in a blatantly obvious place like happened in this story.

I think that any storage area that is behind lock and key, or combination lock or something to that effect is a good start. I think a reasonable person can devise a reasonable storage method that isn't easy to get at. I'm afraid I can't elaborate with design plans or the most popular gun storage products on the market. It's not really an area of expertise on my part.

Now, you may counter that no matter how well you secure the guns, someone could always get at them if they really, really wanted to. Of course. Nothing is absolutely foolproof. Which is yet another reason why I would never want guns in my home.
But, if a person does have guns in their home I would hope they secure them in a way that could prevent a 12 year old kid from getting at them easily. Again, no method is foolproof. But I think that common sense can dictate what exactly "secure" means.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but I get a bit skeptical when I hear "common sense" used in relation to this discussion.

If I keep my firearms in a locked safe, and I have the key on my keyring, what happens when I fall asleep? If I set my keys down to take a piss/shower? If I use a safe with a keypad, what happens if my hypothetical child eventually guesses the code? Are these arguments beyond "common sense"? Not really. As you said, no method is foolproof, but then again there is no specific line to be crossed, just some nebulous idea of "common sense security".

I'm actually kind of surprised at the argument this has stirred. Can anyone really argue with the idea that secure storage of a firearm isn't important?

Sure it's important. It's not a huge problem as a percentage of gun owners, though. In the year 2000 there were 206 children (I use that term loosely since I included 0-15yrs) that committed suicide by firearm out of about 80 million gun owners. Source: CDC

 

[reprise]

Just out of interest, what are the storage regulations relating to guns and ammunition in the US? They are incredibly tough here, and the authorities do physically check that your storage facilities are appropriate and comply with the law.

 

[KelvinG]

I'm not trying to be difficult, but I get a bit skeptical when I hear "common sense" used in relation to this discussion.

If I keep my firearms in a locked safe, and I have the key on my keyring, what happens when I fall asleep? If I set my keys down to take a piss/shower? If I use a safe with a keypad, what happens if my hypothetical child eventually guesses the code? Are these arguments beyond "common sense"? Not really. As you said, no method is foolproof, but then again there is no specific line to be crossed, just some nebulous idea of "common sense security".

Which is precisely why I wouldn't have guns in my home. There is no absolute foolproof method. Although not having them in the house at all is the best plan I can think of. If you want to have guns in you're house, more power too you. But, I suggest you don't set down the keys when you take a piss/shower. I mean, you're right, probably nothing will happen. But it also might. You just never know.

Sure it's important. It's not a huge problem as a percentage of gun owners, though. In the year 2000 there were 206 children (I use that term loosely since I included 0-15yrs) that committed suicide by firearm out of about 80 million gun owners.

I will agree it likely isn't a huge problem. The media loves to whip up a frenzy about deaths from firearms in the home, but I doubt it's an epidemic.
All I'm really saying is that I don't want them in my house, plain and simple.
And if someone does have them in their house, I hope they feel very comfortable regarding their secure storage.

 

[Tony]

Just out of interest, what are the storage regulations relating to guns and ammunition in the US? They are incredibly tough here, and the authorities do physically check that your storage facilities are appropriate and comply with the law.

I dont think there are any storage regulations.

 

[corplinx]

Unfortunatly for your analogy, those items are not designed to kill things. Guns are specifically made with that purpose.

-Who

Guns are designed to punch holes. The first obvious application was of course for combat. There also nail-guns, flare guns, and other variations.

Some guns are designed for hunting big game. Some are designed for police/military use. Some are designed merely for sport shooting.

Handguns in particular are a poor killing weapon. They don't in general have enough power to kill in one shot unless its a head shot. Even then there is a chance for failure to kill. Of course, if you stick one in your mouth and point it at your brain you will most likely get the job done.

 

[ArmchairPhysicist]

Security?

Have any of you actually tried securing something from the grasp of a 5th grade-aged child while still being able to access it yourself? We're not talking infants here; we're talking about a person who has had countless hours of unsupervised time to figure out how to get his hands on the firearms. Put a lock on something, and the first thing the kids are going to do is try getting in; and if you can get in, the kid can get in, key or no key.

The only way to keep the kid away from the guns is to not let him in the house without supervision, which includes while you sleep (the time period when I finally got into my dad's gun cabinet). As long as the kid, you, his friends, his friends' friends, the guy on the corner, or anyone else the kid knows has access to guns, the kid has access to guns.

He had a goal to accomplish, specifically suicide. He chose to use a gun. Had the gun been more securely locked up, he would have spent about ten more minutes getting the cabinet open. Had it been even more securely locked up, it might have been fifteen minutes. Pills or hanging would have taken about as long.

Bottom line: the kid would still be dead, and we would be taking the irresponsible manufacturers of rope to court for making a product that can support the weight of a human teenager.

 

[a_unique_person]

He was planning to kill a lot more kids than just himself. He killed himself once he was busted and there was no way out. Either way, it is clear that guns are a more efficient killing tool than the other methods described here. If he just wanted to kill himself, he would have done it at home.

And that is one thing the gun lobby never seems to acknowledge, guns are designed to make killing more efficient.

 

[Cleopatra]

First of all I don't want the guns to be banned. I am against restrictions in general because if we cannot persuade some people on certain things, let them learn by their mistakes.

In the 20st century, we have made so many great strides, that it's time to start repealing laws instead of imposing new ones. I don't want a society that will resemble to a jail because of the abundance of the restrictions, just to protect the idiots from themselves.

For example:
Do you want to kill yourself with drugs? Go ahead idiot. Just don't expect us to spend our taxes to cure you.

Do you want to risk having guns in your house? Go ahead, don't expect us to feel sorry if your child falls dead or in case MY child is accidentally killed by your stupid offspring, don't ask me to pity you when I will try to make sure that you and your wife will spend the rest of your lives locked in jail for murder I.

So, I don't want guns to be banned.

I have had this conversation before Here and from that conversation two people earned my respect although we totally disagreed : corplinx and andalyn. If all the gun owners approached the matter like those two people, I am sure that we would have found a solution by now but unfortunately most of the people who owe guns don't know a thing about guns and their risks. But Corplinx and Andalyn you are the exceptions that justify the rule, I am afraid.

Corplinx, yes. If an adolescent committed suicide by sleeping pills, yes, I think that we should charge the father for not locking them up.

I am sure that all of you are aware of studies that they show a clear connection between gun ownership and suicides.

Have a look Here

and

Here

Of course there are many-many more.

Those statistics have been questioned, I know but they haven't proved wrong too. I have a simple question for you corplinx and the others. Let's say that even if there is a percentage of 1 in the 1.000.000 that these surveys are right, how can you take the risk to put your child in a potential danger like this.

And let me a bit blunt. Let's say that you do not care about your child or you have a different perspective on the issue. What if your child takes your gun and kills mine while they are playing together, who gives you the right to decide about my child's life too? Don't you think that we have an issue here?

Jedi Knight, the issue of suicide is philosophical but I agree with you only when we are talking about adults and not about children.

As for the suicidal adolescents and people in general. Don't you know why people rather use guns than cut their veins for example when they are determined to commit a suicide?
Because they are afraid to do so. Guns offer an easy, painless death.

 

[jimlintott]

I think that all the fuss about storage is a non-issue. When I was around that age I kept my .22 and my 12 guage in my bedroom closet. My ammunition in a drawer. My Dad didn't own any firearms. If the parent thinks he has done a good job he might not worry too much.

Any one who thinks that the gun isn't for killing things, mostly other human things, is unfamiliar with the history of the gun. But it has also put a lot food on the table.

Reading between the lines makes me want to label this as a bullying tradegy. Is bullying a big problem in the U.S.? Bullies have been around for as long as I can remember. Are the bullies that much worse or are some kids more prone to self victimization? Is bullying percieved to be worse and more damaging today?

My encounters with bullies usually resulted in both of us rolling around on the floor trying to get punches in. I usually lost but bullies are lazy and prefer prey that doesn't fight back. I have seen comments from some American teens that they are often very scared that the bully will pull out a firearm. I know that would keep me from fighting back. Is this true?

 

[shanek]

I agree. And don't most people keep knives out of the reach of young children.
Eventually you begin to trust kids around knives because you can teach them how to use them properly and how to respect how they can be dangerous.

The same can be said of guns, of course.

And remember, the father did have him properly trained in gun handling and use.

I feel I have to mention yet again the DoJ report where they divided kids into 3 groups: Those who obtained guns illegally, those who got them legally (from a parent), and those who never got them at all. Those who got them legally had the lowest rate of violent crime, even below those who were never able to obtain guns at all!

I'm actually kind of surprised at the argument this has stirred. Can anyone really argue with the idea that secure storage of a firearm isn't important?

Is anyone really arguing that?

But, this kid went to school with the intent of using these guns on others.

Do we know that? I see a lot of supposition to that in the article, but that seems to be based purely on the fact that he had guns and he was in a role-playing game. There was no note, no plans on his computer, no nothing to corroborate this.

It's only because his friends weren't down with the plan that he ended up killing himself.

His friends never said that, at least, the article never says that they did. It just says that they saw him with the guns and went to alert the staff. There's nothing about them saying they didn't want to go along with any shooting plan. Again, that's 100% supposition, based on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence.

If it had been difficult, or impossible for him to access firearms, then it's possible he might have never had the idea to do something like he planned on doing.

And if a frog had wings, he wouldn't bump his ass a-hoppin'. We don't know what would or wouldn't have happened otherwise. This was clearly a troubled kid, who killed himself completely unexpectedly, and according to the article, no one knows why.

Also, in the interests of fairness, we should also point out that school incidents like Columbine are very rare. I'm not going to start ranting on this thread that school violence from guns is out of control. It isn't. The media just siezes on any opportunity to report on such stories.

Actually, no they don't—they seem very reluctant to report when such attempts are foiled by an armed citizen.

 

[shanek]

He was planning to kill a lot more kids than just himself. He killed himself once he was busted and there was no way out.

Again, there is ABSOLUTELY NO INDICATION OF THIS WHATSOEVER. It's pure speculation and is only being considered because he used guns and he played an RPG.