The parents should be in jail for reckless endangerment of their child. Every other parent should sue them for reckless endangerment of their children.
We would rather our children exist in prisons, tightly controlled, frisked, recorded, constantly policed? Should we send to North Korea for suggestions?
If doing that were the solution, wouldn't it have worked by now?
Not to sound political, but just about every other government on the 3rd rock from the Sun has figured out how to regulate and control access to guns responsibly. Or at least better than us. As based upon our gun mortality and morbidity rates. At least that's what they showed back when we had a government who still cared about such things. Ahhh, the good ol' days - when math, science, facts mattered...
But right, no politics......apologies.
Incredibly, many of those countries rate much higher on most objective freedom scales than America, as we look to increase our constant monitoring by the state, with people locked up by secret police without due process, living in fear if they speak out, etc.
And as evidenced here, these measures are often implemented with little thought beyond fear, uncertainty, and doubt..
Even when it is admitted, without knowing all of the facts of incident, though we certainly know very well the overall conditions under which it occurred. Because they've been here for a while.
Not like we're inventing cold fusion here.
If you average over 7 guns per man, woman, and child in your country - and you are constantly looking for new and novel ways to increase access and decrease accountability/responsibility until after tragedy occurs - increasing draconian totalitarian measures in areas of learning may not be the best answer. Though it is the one that both those on the right and left seem to most readily agree upon.
Unless what you are teaching your children is fear and dread.
If each home averaged 21 chainsaws in it, would we be particularly surprised if an occasional child was curious about chainsaws and used it improperly?
And since we're talking about it, why are we only worried about the kid having the gun in his backpack once he got to school? Why are we only worried about teachers and students getting shot? If metal detectors are the solution, shouldn't we also install them in stores, playgrounds, street corners?
What's the limit?
Isn't the bigger issue that he has the gun at all?
Why don't we as a community, state, nation - take a breath and both think and seriously talk about it before skipping further down that yellow brick road?
Though I think the word for that would be politics....oh my.
Getting your data from BradyUnited, is like relying on Saturday Night Live for your news.
We tried banning guns, restricting guns, restricting owners, regulating owners, regulating children, the list goes on. The incidents of non-felony firearm use continue to occur (as do criminal use), but what has changed in the last 5 decades? Education. We stopped educating our children on firearm safety and now, they are ignorant adults. Why did this kid bring a gun to school? Because he didn't know how seriously wrong it is and the consequences of that action. It's a lack of his education and his parents' education in controlling a firearm. Education is the solution, not withholding water because it might drown, fire because it might burn, a blade because it might cut.
Every day we are presented with another "gun control law du jour" and just like the one the day before, we are promised THIS one will work. Yet, when it doesn't work, is it repealed? No. Even more gun control is demanded, with the same sick promise and more citizen regulation and less freedom.
The "Gun Safety" advocates never say the truth out loud: Gun control IS NOT criminal control. Passing laws that criminals ignore is useless. How about "Gun Free Zones"? There are over 20,000 gun control laws on the federal, state and local books. If you want a law to control action with a gun, there are many out there. Why are they not being enforced?
Why did the parents of this kid not fear being charged with "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" and "criminal negligence"? It's because the "Gun Safety" advocates just want to pass more laws that ban guns. Otherwise, they would be calling to enforce the laws. Why is Leo not calling for enforcing the laws, instead of demanding the "gun control law du jour"?
Won't spend too much time going back and forth with someone who feels the need for anonymity on a forum with maybe 20-30 readers - but I am in total agreement regarding educating children. But here's what strange.
You insist that we educate children and their parents but you know who you missed?
Gun owners.
Now, if you're advocating that, again - by all means - count me in. Nothing makes more sense than educational requirements and license to operate a tool whose primary purpose is killing. We already do it for the subset of gun owners called "hunters", so please, use that already successful tactic for other gun owners as well.
For that matter, tactics used for other high risk actions - like posting bonds, having liability insurance, proof of proficiency requirements - as required of aircraft pilots, tractor trailer drivers, car operators all make sense to me.
As mentioned above, these common sense measures HAVE been initiated in other nations world wide, with very much better success than we achieve here.
Regarding the laws already in place? Again, if your suggestion is that we have national policies rather than the maze of local ones which have needed to be implemented because gun worshippers have too much sway at the national level to allow uniform, workable gun policies - yes, please. When can we start?
Because when you read the story from yesterday, what you don't see is almost as important as what you do. He didn't have a gun with an adapter that made it convert to automatic. He didn't have readily available nuclear material. Nor a hand grenade. We regulate those things nationally, so they are less readily available to a 3rd grader.
And ps - they DID arrest the parents. But they did so after completing an investigation and determining probable cause of a crime. As they should have. To call for arrests prior to that is just as irrational and irresponsible as demanding metal detectors or squashing debate/dissent while in a panic.
Not particularly rational nor productive. But unfortunately, fairly predictable.
When I taught high school, on a day a kid brought a loaded gun to school and thank god was discovered with it before he used it, I asked one of my classes how many of them knew students who carried weapons in their backpacks. A third of them raised their hands.
The parents should be in jail for reckless endangerment of their child. Every other parent should sue them for reckless endangerment of their children.
Since when did politics become a 4 letter word?
Panicked, knee-jerk reaction is a better option?
We would rather our children exist in prisons, tightly controlled, frisked, recorded, constantly policed? Should we send to North Korea for suggestions?
If doing that were the solution, wouldn't it have worked by now?
Not to sound political, but just about every other government on the 3rd rock from the Sun has figured out how to regulate and control access to guns responsibly. Or at least better than us. As based upon our gun mortality and morbidity rates. At least that's what they showed back when we had a government who still cared about such things. Ahhh, the good ol' days - when math, science, facts mattered...
But right, no politics......apologies.
Incredibly, many of those countries rate much higher on most objective freedom scales than America, as we look to increase our constant monitoring by the state, with people locked up by secret police without due process, living in fear if they speak out, etc.
And as evidenced here, these measures are often implemented with little thought beyond fear, uncertainty, and doubt..
Even when it is admitted, without knowing all of the facts of incident, though we certainly know very well the overall conditions under which it occurred. Because they've been here for a while.
Not like we're inventing cold fusion here.
If you average over 7 guns per man, woman, and child in your country - and you are constantly looking for new and novel ways to increase access and decrease accountability/responsibility until after tragedy occurs - increasing draconian totalitarian measures in areas of learning may not be the best answer. Though it is the one that both those on the right and left seem to most readily agree upon.
Unless what you are teaching your children is fear and dread.
If each home averaged 21 chainsaws in it, would we be particularly surprised if an occasional child was curious about chainsaws and used it improperly?
And since we're talking about it, why are we only worried about the kid having the gun in his backpack once he got to school? Why are we only worried about teachers and students getting shot? If metal detectors are the solution, shouldn't we also install them in stores, playgrounds, street corners?
What's the limit?
Isn't the bigger issue that he has the gun at all?
Why don't we as a community, state, nation - take a breath and both think and seriously talk about it before skipping further down that yellow brick road?
Though I think the word for that would be politics....oh my.
Disregard.
Getting your data from BradyUnited, is like relying on Saturday Night Live for your news.
We tried banning guns, restricting guns, restricting owners, regulating owners, regulating children, the list goes on. The incidents of non-felony firearm use continue to occur (as do criminal use), but what has changed in the last 5 decades? Education. We stopped educating our children on firearm safety and now, they are ignorant adults. Why did this kid bring a gun to school? Because he didn't know how seriously wrong it is and the consequences of that action. It's a lack of his education and his parents' education in controlling a firearm. Education is the solution, not withholding water because it might drown, fire because it might burn, a blade because it might cut.
Every day we are presented with another "gun control law du jour" and just like the one the day before, we are promised THIS one will work. Yet, when it doesn't work, is it repealed? No. Even more gun control is demanded, with the same sick promise and more citizen regulation and less freedom.
The "Gun Safety" advocates never say the truth out loud: Gun control IS NOT criminal control. Passing laws that criminals ignore is useless. How about "Gun Free Zones"? There are over 20,000 gun control laws on the federal, state and local books. If you want a law to control action with a gun, there are many out there. Why are they not being enforced?
Why did the parents of this kid not fear being charged with "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" and "criminal negligence"? It's because the "Gun Safety" advocates just want to pass more laws that ban guns. Otherwise, they would be calling to enforce the laws. Why is Leo not calling for enforcing the laws, instead of demanding the "gun control law du jour"?
Won't spend too much time going back and forth with someone who feels the need for anonymity on a forum with maybe 20-30 readers - but I am in total agreement regarding educating children. But here's what strange.
You insist that we educate children and their parents but you know who you missed?
Gun owners.
Now, if you're advocating that, again - by all means - count me in. Nothing makes more sense than educational requirements and license to operate a tool whose primary purpose is killing. We already do it for the subset of gun owners called "hunters", so please, use that already successful tactic for other gun owners as well.
For that matter, tactics used for other high risk actions - like posting bonds, having liability insurance, proof of proficiency requirements - as required of aircraft pilots, tractor trailer drivers, car operators all make sense to me.
As mentioned above, these common sense measures HAVE been initiated in other nations world wide, with very much better success than we achieve here.
Regarding the laws already in place? Again, if your suggestion is that we have national policies rather than the maze of local ones which have needed to be implemented because gun worshippers have too much sway at the national level to allow uniform, workable gun policies - yes, please. When can we start?
Because when you read the story from yesterday, what you don't see is almost as important as what you do. He didn't have a gun with an adapter that made it convert to automatic. He didn't have readily available nuclear material. Nor a hand grenade. We regulate those things nationally, so they are less readily available to a 3rd grader.
And ps - they DID arrest the parents. But they did so after completing an investigation and determining probable cause of a crime. As they should have. To call for arrests prior to that is just as irrational and irresponsible as demanding metal detectors or squashing debate/dissent while in a panic.
Not particularly rational nor productive. But unfortunately, fairly predictable.
Moving on....
When I taught high school, on a day a kid brought a loaded gun to school and thank god was discovered with it before he used it, I asked one of my classes how many of them knew students who carried weapons in their backpacks. A third of them raised their hands.