Gun Tragedy, 5th grader suicide
- Thread starter Guest
- Start date
-
- Tags
- suicide suicide incidents
a_unique_person said:
I'd like to see you try and get that submitted in court as evidence without getting laughed or yelled at by the judge.
This was a disturbed, troubled kid, who wasn't thinking at all clearly. You're trying to act as if he were behaving completely rationally, when he obviously wasn't.
So, here it is again:
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
This is absolutely horrific. This guy is allegedly responsible enough to have a gunsafe (or other type of locking mechanism) and take his kid to gun safety courses - and then loses the key under the couch? If the guns were for home-defense, this idiot would've been in for one hell of a surprise once he got out his keychain and looked, and looked (and looked).
Then, he finds the key, and hangs it on a wall hook? A wall hook? What, didn't he recognize the damned thing? That's like locking the front door and leaving the key hanging from the porch windchime. I'm not going to say this guy deserved what happened - nobody deserves to see their own kids die - but Jesus, what a price for negligence!
I'm all for gun rights, but too many gun-rights advocates like to rush like fricking Superman to the defense of an attacked Gun Owner, forgiving or perhaps just overlooking grave mistakes such as the ones this guy made. So he had the guns in a place where they would (in theory) be secure. What, does that mean we give him an "A" for ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ effort? And it's true that if the kid really wanted to kill himself, he didn't need a gun - he could have used a kitchen knife, or OD'd on aspirin, or hanged himself in the closet with his belt. But this kid didn't just "really want to kill himself", did he? He took two pistols, three rifles, and 2 shotguns - along with who-knows-how-many-rounds for each of them - to school. I suppose one can make the ludicrious argument that if a kid really, really, really wanted to kill his classmates, he could've used kitchen knives...
Look, this poor guy's learned a lesson that nobody really deserves to be taught, and I really don't think he needs to go to court over this. First impression I get from the article is that he really is a nice guy, and really didn't want anyone - much less his own kid - to be hurt. At worst, I believe this guy was simply a victim of ill-timed absent-mindedness. But damn it, that doesn't cut it when it comes to guns. It is entirely unacceptable! I don't care how nice of a guy he is.
Then, he finds the key, and hangs it on a wall hook? A wall hook? What, didn't he recognize the damned thing? That's like locking the front door and leaving the key hanging from the porch windchime. I'm not going to say this guy deserved what happened - nobody deserves to see their own kids die - but Jesus, what a price for negligence!
I'm all for gun rights, but too many gun-rights advocates like to rush like fricking Superman to the defense of an attacked Gun Owner, forgiving or perhaps just overlooking grave mistakes such as the ones this guy made. So he had the guns in a place where they would (in theory) be secure. What, does that mean we give him an "A" for ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ effort? And it's true that if the kid really wanted to kill himself, he didn't need a gun - he could have used a kitchen knife, or OD'd on aspirin, or hanged himself in the closet with his belt. But this kid didn't just "really want to kill himself", did he? He took two pistols, three rifles, and 2 shotguns - along with who-knows-how-many-rounds for each of them - to school. I suppose one can make the ludicrious argument that if a kid really, really, really wanted to kill his classmates, he could've used kitchen knives...
Look, this poor guy's learned a lesson that nobody really deserves to be taught, and I really don't think he needs to go to court over this. First impression I get from the article is that he really is a nice guy, and really didn't want anyone - much less his own kid - to be hurt. At worst, I believe this guy was simply a victim of ill-timed absent-mindedness. But damn it, that doesn't cut it when it comes to guns. It is entirely unacceptable! I don't care how nice of a guy he is.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
shanek said:
I'd like to see you try and get that submitted in court as evidence without getting laughed or yelled at by the judge.
This was a disturbed, troubled kid, who wasn't thinking at all clearly. You're trying to act as if he were behaving completely rationally, when he obviously wasn't.
So, here it is again:
You said there was no indication, I am saying quite clearly there was an indication he was contemplating a massacre. If taking a bag of guns and ammo to a school is not an indication he was contemplating a massacre, I don't know what is.
Arrggg, not the rolleyes, they burn.
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
If taking 2 pistols, 3 rifles, and 2 shotguns, and lots of ammo to school isn't an indication of a planned massacre, then surely taking 2 pistols, 3 rifles, 2 shotguns, and buckets of ammo after "talking for months about killing students and teachers" might raise a warning flag...
What did he bring them for, show and tell?
What did he bring them for, show and tell?
Guest
Unregistered
G
"This is absolutely horrific. This guy is allegedly responsible enough to have a gunsafe (or other type of locking mechanism) and take his kid to gun safety courses - and then loses the key under the couch?"
I agree, The Other JK.
It makes me wonder if the wall hook is where he usually hung the keys? I wonder if he keeps his life savings in a breadbox for Pete's sake.
I think it is easy to say in hindsight what the father should have done, etc. (I'd say get a combination lock, for starters), but NO ONE should ever be in the "It won't happen to me" mode, which it sounds like, and I may be reading too much into the short article, exactly what the father was in.
-Who
I agree, The Other JK.
It makes me wonder if the wall hook is where he usually hung the keys? I wonder if he keeps his life savings in a breadbox for Pete's sake.
I think it is easy to say in hindsight what the father should have done, etc. (I'd say get a combination lock, for starters), but NO ONE should ever be in the "It won't happen to me" mode, which it sounds like, and I may be reading too much into the short article, exactly what the father was in.
-Who
I have to agree with AUP and Joshua here about the possible school massacre. In fact, if we read the article we can conclusively assume this is what was going to happen but didn't.
Chronologically looking at the events:
He gets ready in the bathroom but before he can finish getting ready he is locked in there while the school goes into emergency lockdown. With no way of executing his plan the kid sees no way out and shoots himself.
Also please note that:
So we have a very clear picture of a psychotic youth who brings large amounts of guns and ammo to school. It doesn't take a genius to work out why...
Chronologically looking at the events:
He gets ready in the bathroom but before he can finish getting ready he is locked in there while the school goes into emergency lockdown. With no way of executing his plan the kid sees no way out and shoots himself.
Also please note that:
So we have a very clear picture of a psychotic youth who brings large amounts of guns and ammo to school. It doesn't take a genius to work out why...
Does it disturb anyone else that when this child was 6 years old his mother was labelling his behaviour as "psychotic"? I'm wondering how much of a chance this young man ever really had when such judgements were being made while he was barely out of nappies.
I can't help but think that if guns were not in the house then the kid would not have taken his dad's [fairly noteworthy] arsenal to school, whatever the reason.
Random thoughts:
If the dad was into sport shooting or whatever, why not leave the guns and ammo locked up at the gun-club or somewhere responsible?
What the hell was he doing leaving the key to the guns and ammo lying around like that? If not the kid, what about any burglar / bad-guy, maybe even the ex-wife, getting hold of them?
Sure, the kid could have had a go at himself with hanging or drugs or a knife or something, but a hanging and drugs take time, and you have to work real hard to kill yourself with a knife - he could easily have been saved (read the article). But a 45 slug through the head is pretty much instantly irrevocable...no turning back...
What a goddamn pity, and a waste of a life.
Zep
Random thoughts:
If the dad was into sport shooting or whatever, why not leave the guns and ammo locked up at the gun-club or somewhere responsible?
What the hell was he doing leaving the key to the guns and ammo lying around like that? If not the kid, what about any burglar / bad-guy, maybe even the ex-wife, getting hold of them?
Sure, the kid could have had a go at himself with hanging or drugs or a knife or something, but a hanging and drugs take time, and you have to work real hard to kill yourself with a knife - he could easily have been saved (read the article). But a 45 slug through the head is pretty much instantly irrevocable...no turning back...
What a goddamn pity, and a waste of a life.
Zep
Guest
Unregistered
G
So the dad was aware of his son's 'psychosis' and 'violent outbursts' and made guns easily available to him??
"and you have to work real hard to kill yourself with a knife"
I agree. And, you can't exactly go around knifing all your classmates. Guns make it so much more easy, those stupid death devices.
-Who
"and you have to work real hard to kill yourself with a knife"
I agree. And, you can't exactly go around knifing all your classmates. Guns make it so much more easy, those stupid death devices.
-Who
If not guns, it would've been something else. How hard would it have been for the kid to create a few explosive devices (petrol bombs would be the easiest) just by using information available on the internet.
I do agree however that guns do in fact make it easier to commit acts of mass murder or suicide.
I do agree however that guns do in fact make it easier to commit acts of mass murder or suicide.
Bearing in mind the age of this young man, and bearing in mind that his intention seemed to be to harm others and perhaps himself as well, I'm not to sure that other types of weapons would have suited his requirements or that those which might have would have been so easy for him to obtain unnoticed.
While a petrol bomb is certainly capable of starting a fire, schools usually have pretty good fire drills and someone is likely to notice a child throwing a molotov from close enough range to ignite a classroom or similar.
While a petrol bomb is certainly capable of starting a fire, schools usually have pretty good fire drills and someone is likely to notice a child throwing a molotov from close enough range to ignite a classroom or similar.
When I was thinking petrol bombs I was thinking tin can filled with petrol sealed shut. It's very easy to include a radio controlled ignition device into this equation and you've got yourself something pretty lethal. Suppose he made a couple of bombs like that and wired them and hid them around the school - then detonated them when kids would be walking through the halls...
There's no easy solution here to the problem. Saying guns are to blame is incorrect because he'd simply use alternative means (perhaps with more destructive power).
There's no easy solution here to the problem. Saying guns are to blame is incorrect because he'd simply use alternative means (perhaps with more destructive power).
reprise said:
Guest
Unregistered
G
"Saying guns are to blame is incorrect because he'd simply use alternative means (perhaps with more destructive power).'{/i]
Strawman.
The fact is that he didn't use BBQ tongs, belts, or ceiling fans. He used guns, whose main purpose is to punch holes in and seriously injure, but mainly kill people.
Saying he could used X or Y is a strawman, because he didn't. He used GUNS, easily obtainable guns.
-Who
Strawman.
The fact is that he didn't use BBQ tongs, belts, or ceiling fans. He used guns, whose main purpose is to punch holes in and seriously injure, but mainly kill people.
Saying he could used X or Y is a strawman, because he didn't. He used GUNS, easily obtainable guns.
-Who
It's not a strawman....
A strawman is altering the arguer's position and replying to the distorted version.
In fact your reply is a perfect strawman. I wasn't talking about BBQ tongs, I was talking about possibility of using more destructive means if guns were not available...
Also the main point of bombs is to blow people and things up last time I checked...
A strawman is altering the arguer's position and replying to the distorted version.
In fact your reply is a perfect strawman. I wasn't talking about BBQ tongs, I was talking about possibility of using more destructive means if guns were not available...
Also the main point of bombs is to blow people and things up last time I checked...
Whodini said:
Guest
Unregistered
G
The word "strawman" exists simply so I can employ it in my day-to-day trolling activities.
-Who
-Who
evildave
Unregistered
E
Alas, it's time for the WISQARS link again.
What *ACTUALLY* kills 12 year olds in America? Of ALL of the 12 year old children who died....
Unintentional Injury 259
Malignant Neoplasms (cancer) 110
Suicide 43
Congenital Anomalies 42
Homicide 38
Heart Disease 19
Chronic Low.Respiratory Disease 17
Cerebro-vascular 12
Benign Neoplasms 8
Breakdown of unintentional injuries:
MV Traffic 147
Drowning 28
Suffocation 14
Other Land Transport 12
Fire/burn 11
Firearm 9
Breaking down suicide:
Suffocation 26
Firearm 11
Poisoning 3
Fall 1
Other Spec., classifiable 1
Unspecified 1
Breaking down homicide:
Homicide Firearm 22
Homicide Other Spec., 4
Homicide Suffocation 4
Homicide Unspecified 4
Homicide Cut/pierce 2
Homicide Fire/burn 1
Homicide Other Spec., classifiable 1
Banning cars would be the most sensible thing to prevent the deaths of 12 year old children. The numbers say it all. Prosecuting parents who don't have their kids in seatbelts with attempted (or successful) murder should be done routinely. 42 kids from all types of firearm deaths, and 147 just for motor vehicle accidents. Ban cars.
Naturally, if all the guns disappeared today, the "suffocation" category in suicides would spike up a bit. They're already over twice as likely to hang or suffocate themselves than shoot, so let's ban rope and plastic bags.
What *ACTUALLY* kills 12 year olds in America? Of ALL of the 12 year old children who died....
Unintentional Injury 259
Malignant Neoplasms (cancer) 110
Suicide 43
Congenital Anomalies 42
Homicide 38
Heart Disease 19
Chronic Low.Respiratory Disease 17
Cerebro-vascular 12
Benign Neoplasms 8
Breakdown of unintentional injuries:
MV Traffic 147
Drowning 28
Suffocation 14
Other Land Transport 12
Fire/burn 11
Firearm 9
Breaking down suicide:
Suffocation 26
Firearm 11
Poisoning 3
Fall 1
Other Spec., classifiable 1
Unspecified 1
Breaking down homicide:
Homicide Firearm 22
Homicide Other Spec., 4
Homicide Suffocation 4
Homicide Unspecified 4
Homicide Cut/pierce 2
Homicide Fire/burn 1
Homicide Other Spec., classifiable 1
Banning cars would be the most sensible thing to prevent the deaths of 12 year old children. The numbers say it all. Prosecuting parents who don't have their kids in seatbelts with attempted (or successful) murder should be done routinely. 42 kids from all types of firearm deaths, and 147 just for motor vehicle accidents. Ban cars.
Naturally, if all the guns disappeared today, the "suffocation" category in suicides would spike up a bit. They're already over twice as likely to hang or suffocate themselves than shoot, so let's ban rope and plastic bags.
I'm not in a position to dispute the numbers, so I'll take them as valid. But this is a generalisation in the extreme. We are not talking about "what kills all 12 year olds this year", we are talking about the availability of guns to kids to DELIBERATELY hurt themselves and others with.evildave said:
So let's look at the results for DELIBERATE harm by selves or others:
Suicide 43 (firearm 11, suffocation 26, others 6)
Homicide 38 (firearm 22, others 26)
Now let's total that up:
Firearm involvement: 33 out of 81 incidents, 41%
So two out of five deliberate deaths of 12 year olds are due to firearms, according to this data.
Question: If these avoidable deaths were due to, say, an immunisable disease like mumps or chickenpox, would anyone contend that such immunisation should be witheld on the basis of a legal code, like "it's in the US constitution that we can have mumps"?
Zep
Guest
Unregistered
G
I'm not saying 'ban guns', I'm saying 'don't leave the key to the guns and ammo sitting around where kids can easily get it. And keep track of it (ie. don't lose it under the couch). Actually be responsible and properly secure your firearms and ammo if you have any.'
-Who
-Who