Two Dead, Three Injured In Shooting At Seattle Area High School
Another school shooting.
At least two people, including the alleged shooter, are dead and three others are injured after a shooting at a High School outside of Seattle, Washington:
A student with a “blank stare” opened fire in the cafeteria of a high school north of Seattle on Friday, killing one person and wounding at least two others before killing himself, police and witnesses said.
Officials said the gunman was dead and provided no other details on casualties. A hospital official said three patients were in “very critical condition” after the 10:30 a.m. PDT shooting at Marysville-Pilchuck High School. Another patient is being treated at another hospital with “less serious” injuries.
Students described how an ordinary lunch period erupted in violence with no warning as a freshman silently began shooting in the cafeteria.
“Just all of a sudden I see him stand up, pull something out of his pocket,” Austin Taylor, who had just finished eating lunch at the next table, told NBC affiliate KING.
Taylor said he heard one pop, then four more after that.
“I saw three kids just fall from the table like they were falling from the ground dead,” he said.
As the gunman fiddled with the small pistol, Taylor said, he ran from the cafeteria and into a classroom.
“He had a blank stare,” Taylor said. “He was just staring at the victims as he shot them.
“He was just calm during the whole thing and he was perfectly fine the day before.”
Another student, Alan Perez, said he also saw the gunman pull out his weapon.
“I just dropped my skateboard and ran as fast as I could,” told KING. “I saw he had a little gun in his hand, and saw the flash from the muzzle of the gun.”
After the shooting, someone pulled the fire alarm and students rushed out of classrooms only to be ushered back in by staff as the building was placed on lockdown.
Cindy Rodriguez, 17, told NBC News that as she hunkered down in a classroom with about 40 other teens, she texted her kid brother, who was in the lunchroom.
“I wanted to make sure he was OK. He told me a freshman brought a gun to school and he shot four people,” she said.
Police evacuated the school room by room, leading out groups of young people with their hands up as frantic parents rushed to the campus.
As moms and dads were reunited with their kids at a church, doctors were working to save the wounded.
Four patients were taken to Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett, where chief medical officer Dr. Joanne Roberts said three were rushed to operating rooms. A fourth was in less serious condition and was transferred to a Seattle hospital.
Marysville Police Cmdr. Robb Lamoureaux said the motive was not known but investigators were confident there was only one shooter.
More from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
MARYSVILLE, Wash. — Shots rang out late Friday morning at the cafeteria at Marysville Pilchuck High School, leaving the shooter and another person dead and at least four students were wounded.
Three of the students suffered head wounds and were in surgery Friday afternoon at Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett. A hospital spokewoman described them as being in “very critical” condition.
Marysville Police Commander Robb Lamoureux said Friday the shooter was a student at the high school an h0ur north of Seattle, and could not say if anyone else was wounded. The shooter apparently committed suicide.
He later said a second person was dead but could not say whether that person was a student..
Four students were taken to Providence Regional Medical Center. Harborview Medical Center in Seattle said one of those students, a male, was later flown there. Providence Medical Center said the student sent to Harborview was not in as critical condition as the other three.
Someone from the school reported the shooting to 911 at 10:40 a.m.
The school went on lockdown, and heavily armed police swarmed the school north of Seattle. Live reports from television later showed students streaming out of the school and being led to a nearby church where family could pick them up.
Raw video from the scene showed parents and their children tearfully reuniting.
Two students are dead after one of them opened fire Friday morning in the Marysville-Pilchuck High School cafeteria before turning the gun on himself, according to law-enforcement sources.
Police said four other people were wounded in the 10:45 a.m. shooting.
Austin Joyner, a student at the school, said on Twitter that he saw the shooter come into the cafeteria, walk over to a table, pull out a gun and shoot students who were sitting there.
Jarron Webb, 15, said the shooter was angry at a girl who would not date him, and that the girl was one of the people shot. He said he believes one of the victims was his friend since kindergarten.
Students reported pandemonium in lunchroom after the shooting, with dozens rushing for doors and then jumping a fence to escape.
Freshman Austin Wright said every exit in lunchroom was jammed with kids escaping gunfire. “I heard three gunshots and I ran.”
Four of the injured were taken by ambulance to Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett. Three, all young people, were in critical condition with head injuries. A fourth, with lesser injuries, was transferred to Harborview Medical Center in Seattle.
At a noon news conference, Marysville Police Commander Robb Lamoureux called the scene an active investigation and said police officers were going door-to-door to ensure that the campus was safe. They were leaving tape to mark the doors of rooms that had been cleared. Officers were finding students and staff members hiding alone or in small groups.
“We are confident that there was only one shooter and that the shooter is dead,” Lamoureux said. He did not confirm reports of injuries. Students were reporting that he was a freshman.
Some of the school’s 1,200 students were being evacuated, walking out and across the fields with their hands up. Others were being told to stay inside classrooms.
Sophomore Arlene Cortez, 16, says she locked herself in a classroom with other students for about 45 minutes before police came in.
Some were bused to the nearby Shoultes Gospel Hall, where they are being accounted for. Lamoureux urged parents and family members of students to stay away from the scene, saying authorities would provide information on a location for them to be reunited with students.
At the church, tearful parents and students were being reunited, and hugging.
“I never thought I would be standing here after a school shooting,” said Heather Parker, whose son, Corbin, is a senior. “He’s pretty shook up. He just said ‘I’m OK.’ He was trying to calm me down.”
Adam Holston, 14, a freshman, was just leaving the lunchroom when the gunfire broke out. “Everyone just started running. I could hear the gunshots and my heart was racing and we didn’t know what was going on.”
Some ran out to the parking lot, some to the field.
“Someone opened a door and we all ran into classrooms and just stayed there.”
He said all students had been loaded on buses. His sister is a senior. He’s been texting with her and she’s OK.
“The person who everyone thinks did it was just acting normally. It didn’t seem like there was anything wrong.”
In a news conference from the hospital where the students who survived the shooting are being treated, it was stated that all of the wounds were head wounds, which seems to indicate quite gruesomely that the shooter was intending to kill when he fired the shots and may have had some experience firing weapons before. However, since this is still a developing news story, there are still plenty of details that remain unknown, including the identity of the shooter and the victims, the motive for the shooting, although the news report above does seem to provide at least some clue as to what a motive might have been, and whether there might have been any warning that this could happen. Hovering over it all, of course, is the question of how the shooter, who appears to have been male and that the weapon appears to have been a pistol of some kind rather than a rifle or some other kind of semi-automatic weapon. Other than that, though, there really aren’t many other details available at this time, and anything else that’s said at this point is merely speculation. Hopefully, though, the students who are being treated for their injuries will pull through and recover from their injuries.
There’s no link as of yet but CNN is reporting that law enforcement is identifying the shooter as 14 year old Jaylen Freiberg, and said that he was apparently the Freshman class’s Homecoming King at the ceremony that took place just one week ago. What happened to push him over the edge like this, though, remains to be answered.
Otherwise, best of wishes to the students and the families of Marysville as they deal with this latest round of insanity. In the meantime, for those interested, here’s streaming video from Seattle television station KING:
If only all those kids had been armed.
Sad and unfortunate. We – as a nation – are awash in guns, and there really is no serious desire make it more difficult to obtain guns. Unfortunately, it is a virtual statistical certainty that these kind of events will happen periodically.
In the USA it’s all about winning – high schools focus too much on grades – and only the utmost bright kids get praise – otherwise you are just a number that they have to push thru the door to graduation. So many kids go unnoticed, hurting, being hurt, frustrated to the max (I have a freshman in high school right now) with the tedious boring high school routine, same thing day in, day out – I can’t blame them. I am glad I am from Europe originally so I can tell my boy to not take it too serious all this teasing, these idiot teachers half of them that apparently can degrade you in class and no one speaks up, it’s a horrible, horrible system and your government is at fault here, along with all these principals that help enable this systematic pushing out numbers instead of people. I wish I had never moved here with my teen – I so regret coming here but now he is too far behind to fit into the European school system or otherwise I’d take the next plane out.
You are absolutely right. Our schools are obsessed with testing and credentialing. They are draining the joy out of life for kids.
But kids are often unhappy. It doesn’t become someone else’s problem until they get a gun.
If you saturate a society with guns, you get dead kids.
So more Americans died from guns today than have died from ebola so far. But hey, let’s go nuts about ebola while doing nothing about the gun death epidemic. Makes perfect sense in the conservative Bizarro universe!
This shooting isn’t a mass shooting, so a bit OT, but, Rate of Mass Shootings Has Tripled Since 2011, Harvard Research Shows:
@Elisabeth McDonnell: @michael reynolds: I used to spend a lot of time in Japan on business. The Japanese put incredible pressure on their students until they suddenly noticed a large percentage of those students were committing suicide.
There are not many instances where this aging liberal hippie agrees with wingnuts and tea party types but the counterproductive “Common Core” is certainly one of them.
Easily 90% of stress in the lives of my wife and I comes from our kids’ schools. I hated school when I was in it, I hate it worse now.
Kids are being hammered, buried, attacked by schools whose real purpose is to score well enough to keep local real estate prices inflated.
I still find it a little surprising that as a country we have decided that free access to guns is worth the cost in human lives.
Sure, there are other issues here, there always are, but it happens with such regularity that someone shoots up a school, or kids get their hands on their parents’ guns and shoot themselves (accidentally or suicide), some lunatic goes on a shooting spree, or a robbery turns to homicide — it happens with such regularity that we cannot ignore the impact of having so many guns around, unless we choose to be willfully ignorant.
Each year, a bit more than 30,000 people are killed by guns in this country, and a bit more than 30,000 people are killed in car accidents. Roughly equivalent numbers.
Cars give us independence, transportation to work, the ability to see friends and family, etc. It’s a trade off that we accept, and work to minimize the impact of (car related deaths are way, way down from the 1970s and 80s).
What do guns give us?
@al-Ameda: @al-Ameda: Except a 14 can’t just buy a gun from a store you have to be 18(in many states) There are already background checks in place so how that or any gun laws would have stopped this is beyond me. Most mass shooters(though by FBI and other definitions this wouldn’t be considered a mass shooting a horrific event yes) aren’t career criminals and have no criminal record usually and aren’t diagnosed with whatever illness they have until a horrific event like this happens
“I still find it a little surprising that as a country we have decided that free access to guns is worth the cost in human lives.” Well it’s already illegal to buy a gun at 14 from a store so how gun laws would have stopped him from getting his gun is beyond me.
“Each year, a bit more than 30,000 people are killed by guns in this country, and a bit more than 30,000 people are killed in car accidents. Roughly equivalent numbers.” most of those 30,000 are suicides/self inflicting wounds
“What do guns give us?” well if you live or own a store in a bad neighborhood it’s very useful. Most legal gun owners and mentally ill don’t commit violent crimes, in fact most legal gun owners don’t even fire their gun at a person or people
@michael reynolds: I have a fairly high IQ and always did well on placement tests but my grades were horrible. Way back in the early 60s I was in a highschool “underachievers” program. The adviser for the class once asked me what my problem was and was shocked when I looked him in the eyes and told him high school was interfering with my education. I managed to graduate from high school but did very well in college getting both a bachelors and masters degree. I went on to have a very successful career as a scientist and engineer as well as teaching literature at a community college at night. I have also taught photography and painting. I left out my 4 years as an agent for the DIA – I was really bad at that.
Spell checker does remind me that I still can’t spell after 69 years however.
And security systems, more and better police, and guard dogs are even more useful for protection purposes. That’s how store owners do it in every other civilized country in the world.And guess what, children and disturbed people can’t kill others with them.
Most legal car owners don’t kill people with their cars, either, but we regulate the hell out of cars and car owners.
So guns are mostly useless except as deadly playtoys that children and disturbed people can use to kill themselves and other people. Thanks for making my case, Nameless.
@anonymous: If a 14 year old gets his hands on a gun, some adult (possibly the parents) has committed a crime by either giving him access to the gun, or not ensuring he doesn’t have access to the gun.
I would be perfectly fine with prosecuting the owners of that gun for negligent homicide.
I would not hold my breath.
Do you think 30,000 deaths a year, including homicides, suicides and accidents, is a good price to pay for this?
Are there other benefits you are leaving out? Because mostly it sounds like “you need guns to protect yourself from other people with guns.”
@stonetools: “And security systems, more and better police, and guard dogs are even more useful for protection purposes. That’s how store owners do it in every other civilized country in the world.And guess what, children and disturbed people can’t kill others with them.” Right they kill other people with knifes bats plus police don’t show up until after the crime has committed.
“Most legal car owners don’t kill people with their cars, either, but we regulate the hell out of cars and car owners.” But is a car in the constitution? Nope,plus how would we enforce these laws? Have the police check up in someones house without a warrant and have no due process like in new york?
“So guns are mostly useless except as deadly playtoys that children and disturbed people can use to kill themselves and other people. Thanks for making my case, Nameless.” Except according to the NIH swimming pools and other diseases kill children more then guns. Depending on the hands they are in, in some cases they can be bad like with this situation, but what you are doing is lumping in legal gun owners who use guns to protect themselves and hunt in with nut cases
What do guns give us? Death. Just what they were designed to give us. Death and more death. Blood on the hands of the gun cult. Blood on the hands of cowardly politicians. Dead children = profit for the manufacturers and retailers.
We are a sick society, and no part of it sicker than the gun cult.
@Gustopher: “Do you think 30,000 deaths a year, including homicides, suicides and accidents, is a good price to pay for this?” No however people will always kill themselves no matter what and you probably would not say anything about it
“Are there other benefits you are leaving out? Because mostly it sounds like “you need guns to protect yourself from other people with guns.”” right because when someone breaks into your house WITH A GUN how else will someone fight back? say back off sir? yeah that would go over well
The kid probably got it from his father’s desk drawer or unlocked safe. A law requiring that gun owners secure their guns or the owners would be liable for whatever harm occurs as a result of their not securing their guns would go a long way toward making gun owners careful about locking up their lethal playthings. But somehow, the gun cultists aren’t about making gun owners responsible for their guns, so kids get their hands on them, and predictable mayhem ensues.
@Gustopher: “If a 14 year old gets his hands on a gun, some adult (possibly the parents) has committed a crime by either giving him access to the gun, or not ensuring he doesn’t have access to the gun.” What if he stole it? So we should just lock up anyone who’s kid steals a gun?
“I would be perfectly fine with prosecuting the owners of that gun for negligent homicide.” So then if a kid steals his parents car and kills two people with it should they be charged for that? again just applying your logic
So the gun cult creates a disease and then claims to be the cure. Perfect.
@anonymous: 30,000 too high? How about 15,000 — roughly homicide plus accident deaths. Let’s assume all the suicides are successful with razor blades and pills as they are with guns (not true, by the way)
Is 15,000 dead people a year, give or take half the number killed by cars, worth it for the benefit of freely available guns?
@stonetools: “The kid probably got it from his father’s desk drawer or unlocked safe. A law requiring that gun owners secure their guns or the owners would be liable for whatever harm occurs as a result of their not securing their guns would go a long way toward making gun owners careful about locking up their lethal playthings. But somehow, the gun cultists aren’t about making gun owners responsible for their guns, so kids get their hands on them, and predictable mayhem ensues.” So then we’ll have the police just check someone’s house without a warrant and have no due process right? ok gotcha. If you’re wanting a laws like that then you are violating civil liberties not just 2nd amendment right
@michael reynolds: @Gustopher: How did legal gun owners cause this? how? Legal gun owners don’t go out and shoot up school and rob stores if you think that then i’d suggest you stop watching msnbc
This may shock and amaze you. But the word “gun” doesn’t appear in the Constitution either.
Now that we’re beyond the kindergarten state of constitutional interpretation, the courts tell us that that guns can be regulated. In my above post, I gave my proposal for a law that would require gun owners to secure their weapons. A law requiring that gun owners buy liability insurance would also help.Anyway, I’m off . I’ve debated too many gun nuts this week as it is.
@Gustopher: FBI(yes that one) shows gun murders at 8,855 not 15,000 like you say. So if we have 15,000 deaths by cars should we ban cars? if if were done by knifes then ban knifes? i mean that’s where you’re getting
@stonetools: “This may shock and amaze you. But the word “gun” doesn’t appear in the Constitution either.” Arms are guns but thanks for being intellectually dishonest and ridiculous
“Now that we’re beyond the kindergarten state of constitutional interpretation, the courts tell us that that guns can be regulated. In my above post, I gave my proposal for a law that would require gun owners to secure their weapons.” Which would violate the 4th amendment and other civil liberties which in that case you’d be no different they say Dick Cheney(except you’d want to shred gun owners civil liberties unlike cheney who shredded muslims who weren’t linked to terrorists)
No, a 14 year old can’t purchase a gun, however that was not my point.
I was referring to the general availability and supply of guns in America – over 300M guns. When someone wants a gun (even a person as young as 14) they may not have to buy a gun, it seems that they are able to obtain one without much difficulty.
Because we have no political will to consider reducing gun availability, or to somehow make it more difficult to procure weaponry, I contend that we’re going to have to accept a high probability that this kind of shooting (or even a mass shooting) is going to happen periodically. We have a strong cult of gun ownership in America, a collateral result of it is an occasional incident such as this.
The bottom line is that, as a society, we have accepted this. It’s part of the status quo now.
But, hey, people die in falls in the shower too, so it’s all good.
@al-Ameda: “I was referring to the general availability and supply of guns in America – over 300M guns. When someone wants a gun (even a person as young as 14) they may not have to buy a gun, it seems that they are able to obtain one without much difficulty.” Yeah buy it off the streets or from someone that can pass a background check(kind of like drug laws the one’s you gun grabbers say that don’t work)
“Because we have no political will to consider reducing gun availability, or to somehow make it more difficult to procure weaponry, I contend that we’re going to have to accept a high probability that this kind of shooting (or even a mass shooting) is going to happen periodically. We have a strong cult of gun ownership in America, a collateral result of it is an occasional incident such as this.” Well there already is!! background checks are in place(fact) The fact is that according to fbi statistics 39% get their guns from family members who can pass a background check 39% from the streets 10% from straw purchase and less then 1% get them from gun shows or stores. Most legal gun owners aren’t responsible for mass shootings or gun crime in the country.
@anjin-san: Ban showers now?
@anonymous: Add in the accidental deaths, and you get to roughly 15,000.
And, for the benefit that cars give to our society, I think 30,000 deaths per year is a pretty cheap price to pay. It’s a number that we have brought down from 50,000 in the 70s and 80s, and we can push it down further.
What I don’t see from the gun enthusiasts is any willingness to say “yes, guns are worth this many deaths”, or any interest in cutting that number.
For instance: Close the gun show loophole, and hold owners legally responsible for the damage their gun causes — two straightforward things that would reduce guns in the hands of criminals, and accidental gun deaths.
When did I advocate banning anything?
If you have to lie to support your position, your position sucks.
If you have a tool of death in your home, then, yes, you should be legally liable for the damage it causes if you fail to take reasonable steps to secure it.
And, if there was a national pattern of kids taking their parents car and running people over with it, and if cars served no other purpose than killing, then yes, it would be equivalent.
Also, block quote is your friend.
1) Collect detailed data on gun deaths. (Blocked by the NRA.)
2) Phase in safe gun technology. (Blocked by the NRA.)
3) Close the gun show loophole. (Blocked by the NRA.)
4) Require safe and secure gun storage. (Blocked by the NRA.)
5) Hold gun owners liable for any misuse of improperly stored guns. (Blocked by the NRA.)
None of those steps violates the 2d amendment, none is a danger to decent gun owners, but all are blocked by the NRA. Why? Because each might reduce gun sales, and none of this is really about rights, it’s all about money. Money. 30,000 deaths per year for profit.
The gun cult are just brainwashed dupes, the real criminals are the manufacturers and the politicians they buy.
@Gustopher: “Add in the accidental deaths, and you get to roughly 15,000.” Yes That’s everything not just murder!! You’re more likely to get struck by lighting then killed by a gun, a lot of those 30,000 are suicides and not just murder!!
“What I don’t see from the gun enthusiasts is any willingness to say “yes, guns are worth this many deaths”, or any interest in cutting that number.” One will hurt themselves no matter what weather it be a gun or hanging or overdosing
“For instance: Close the gun show loophole, and hold owners legally responsible for the damage their gun causes — two straightforward things that would reduce guns in the hands of criminals, and accidental gun deaths.” The gun show loophole is not real most criminals don’t get their guns from gun stores or shows(Source FBI) so if someone steals a gun and the then that person uses it to kill someone then the gun owners who did nothing should go to jail!! how fantastic filling up non violent not even criminals!! that will work out so well like putting people who smoke pot in jail!! and no it wouldn’t reduce crime(IE chicago,new york and california, califronia which has gun confiscation and crime has not gone down)
@michael reynolds: “1) Collect detailed data on gun deaths. (Blocked by the NRA.)
2) Phase in safe gun technology. (Blocked by the NRA.)
3) Close the gun show loophole. (Blocked by the NRA.)
4) Require safe and secure gun storage. (Blocked by the NRA.)
5) Hold gun owners liable for any misuse of improperly stored guns. (Blocked by the NRA.)” 1) already is look at FBI and DOJ
3) yeah having track guns in someone’s house isn’t Orwellian at all
4)Which then you’d have warrantless searches and would violent many civil liberties like the 4th amendment
5) ah yes let’s prosecute non violent not even criminals because their gun was stolen and used in a crime they didn’t commit, yeah that’s worked out so well putting people who smoke pot in jail
Every illegally owned/used gun in this country was either imported illegally from abroad, or illegally transferred from a legal owner to an illegal owner. The people who make that transfer — straw purchasers, legal owners to fail to secure their guns, people who steal guns — need to be prosecuted.
There is an explicit right to bear arms in the constitution, but it also explicitly allows regulation. If we assume modern guns constitute arms in the eye of the founding fathers (we don’t assume this for nuclear weapons, for instance, so there is a line somewhere between musket and nuclear weapon), the government can still regulate weapons by tracking them. Did you sell a gun to Vinny down the street or let your kid get ahold of it? The legal trail of possession ends with you, so you would have some explaining to do.
Wow. Kind of disturbing seeing how your mind works. Paranoia, fantasy and irrationality. You’re just the kind of guy who has no business owning a gun.
No, the lack of warrants would mean it would only be investigated if there is probable cause. Like a shooting. Or a parent complaining that their kid was playing at someone’s house and the guns were unsecured.
@Gustopher: “Every illegally owned/used gun in this country was either imported illegally from abroad, or illegally transferred from a legal owner to an illegal owner. The people who make that transfer — straw purchasers, legal owners to fail to secure their guns, people who steal guns — need to be prosecuted.” Yes and no law could stop it being transfored from coming in this country illegally that’s for proving a point!! Not if the gun was bought off the streets or stolen! Not if they go through a background check and pass and have no criminal record. Yes people who steal guns need to be prosecuted not the legal gun owners who had their guns stolen and people who sold it to someone who would have passed a background check
@michael reynolds: Me? you’re the one who wants to use men with guns to point guns at other people and want to violate other’s civil liberties. You want to put people whose guns have been stolen and used in a murder or robbery blame them and put them in jail.
@Gustopher: Except that it would be a broad warrant(kind of like what the nsa does and what the safe act does)
If I improperly store gasoline and it catches fire and burns my neighbor’s house down I can be sued for negligence. In some cases where death occurs I could be criminally charged.
Let’s say I leave guns out on my porch on Halloween for any passing kid to pick up. You’d claim I had no liability?
Re-linking to an excerpt from Gabby Giffords book about the cowards in Congress…
Anonymous is compensating, eh?
@michael reynolds: “If I improperly store gasoline and it catches fire and burns my neighbor’s house down I can be sued for negligence. In some cases where death occurs I could be criminally charged.” That’s a accidentally death so you’re comparing apples and oranges, you also wouldn’t be throw in jail and charged with murder.
“Let’s say I leave guns out on my porch on Halloween for any passing kid to pick up. You’d claim I had no liability?” did you sell it to him intentially? then no
Not quite the case. Some of the perpetrators of mass gun violence were in fact lawful and legal gun owner until until they committed the act of gun violence and murder. To me, mass availability of weaponry is a public heath problem, and one that we do not care to do anything about.
@al-Ameda: “Not quite the case. Some of the perpetrators of mass gun violence were in fact lawful and legal gun owner until until they committed the act of gun violence and murder. To me, mass availability of weaponry is a public heath problem, and one that we do not care to do anything about.” Which case? Yes aaron alexis,the aurora shooter, and the man who shot gif fords had gotten they’re guns legally but they had no criminal records and were not diagnosed with a mental illness and would have passed a background check. In what cases though has a say NRA member shot up a school? please i’d love to know. Oh elliot ruger was a legal gun owner however his family wanted him to be committed but the doctors said he was no threat. http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulhsieh/2014/07/28/gun-violence-is-not-a-public-health-issue/
That analogy fails at a very elemental level – people generally do not purchase knives or automobiles for the purpose of killing others or defending themselves
@al-Ameda: SAME WITH GUNS THEY ARE A TOOL!!!! But they can be used like cars and knifes to kill people
Hate to derail, but I grew up in Marysville, WA. I didn’t go to this high school, but I went to a different public high school across town. Our home was about a ten minute walk from Marysville-Pilchuck, and my sister went there for a couple years until we moved out of state. I walked to that school every morning with my sister, where she went in to class and I hopped on a bus to take me to my school. It was surreal for me, watching the videos of the students running out of the buildings. I’ve been standing in those exact spots, just 6 or so years ago.
@anonymous: Apart from hunting game, or shooting range recreational activity, what practical use do guns have?
Cars and knives on the other hand are purchased for their utility and often necessary practical functions.
We’re enamored of guns and nothing is going to change this any time soon. Our supply and availability of guns is a public health problem, and one that do not want to address.
@anonymous: Please, tell us more about this amazing, versatile tool called the gun. Other than killing and maiming, are there more things that it can do?
Or, is the right question not what can a gun do, but what can’t a gun do?
You can use it as a hammer, it makes a lovely knock-knack on the mantle, you can use it to stir a boiling pot of pasta, you can use to to merely threaten to kill!
@al-Ameda: “Apart from hunting game, or shooting range recreational activity, what practical use do guns have?” So do all cops use their guns in anger when they shoot someone? Most legal gun owners don’t even fire a shot in anger.
“Cars and knives on the other hand are purchased for their utility and often necessary practical functions.” especially when drinking and driving and wanting to rob someone
“We’re enamored of guns and nothing is going to change this any time soon. Our supply and availability of guns is a public health problem, and one that do not want to address.” The fact(according to the fbi) gun crime is down as is suicide and mass shootings are not on the rise despite what some hear
I must say I consider “anonymous” to be a perfect example of Gun Cult Man. Jenos and bill and the rest of the gun nuts here should aspire to equal his level of rational argument. Socrates himself would bow before him.
@Gustopher: “Please, tell us more about this amazing, versatile tool called the gun. Other than killing and maiming, are there more things that it can do?” You realize most legal gun owners don’t even fire their gun in anger many go targeting practicing and have it in case most don’t even fire it for home invasion
“You can use it as a hammer, it makes a lovely knock-knack on the mantle, you can use it to stir a boiling pot of pasta, you can use to to merely threaten to kill!” you can also use a hammer to kill fyi
@michael reynolds: Ah yes coming from the man who wants to throw law abiding citizens in jail for simply owning a gun and wants men with guns to enforce these laws. Let me ask how are you going to enforce these laws?
He is not a gun cult devotee. He is a paid flack or a bot. His answers are too pat and uniform and are grammatically correct and well written from a technical standpoint. Compare his writings to the typical gun devotee and you’ll notice a huge difference.
Thats why I was amused to see a few of you caught up with him/her/it in a back and forth.
I don’t know, a perfect example would have mastered the block quote button. And, so far, no suggestion of overthrowing the tyranny of the government.
I was kind of hoping for “a well armed society keeps the government from tipping to tyranny and that’s well worth 30,000 dead per year.” Something meaty, taking responsibility for the disaster that is our gun culture, and believing it to be the least worst alternative.
I mean, can we prove England won’t become a fascist state at some point in the future? If everyone were armed, Prince Charles would know he couldn’t push everyone around that way when his mother finally dies. But now… Who knows what horrors will happen?
I’m wondering how those parents are going to feel about giving guns to their kid now?
Oh well…as long as the NRA thinks kids and guns are a good idea it must be a good idea.
For those of you who thought the kid went off because of Common Core or pressure to keep his grades up, it was apparently because a girl turned him down for a date, according to a classmate quoted in the Seattle Times.
Amazing. Is that going to be the standard response for sexual rejection?
Angst-ridden teenagers are nothing new, of course. What’s new is intersection of teenage angst and the easy availability of powerful firearms, along with a gun cult lobby hell bent on preventing us from doing anything to address the problem.. As you can see in the dialogue with Nameless, we are certainly not going to reason them into agreeing to work on the issue, so expect other school shootings soon.
I’m so glad we’re having exactly the same conversation yet again. At least there’s an upside to these mass killings of children — it gets everyone making the same arguments over and over again.
Still, I do wonder if anonymous is one of our gun nuts or if he’s someone new. If he is new it’s kind of frightening that he makes exactly the same points in exactly the same words as the others.
Yeah, because girls never turned down boys and guns were never available at the hardware store or out of a Sears and Roebuck catalog prior to 2014.
Or at least a blank line.
For the sake of making your posts easier to read, please try this:
“You can use it as a hammer, it makes a lovely knock-knack on the mantle, you can use it to stir a boiling pot of pasta, you can use to to merely threaten to kill!”
you can also use a hammer to kill fyi
I guess this 67-year old grandfather was just compensating for the size of his penis.
I guess he should have just called 911 and waited for the police to arrive, or I guess he wasn’t a “real man” because he couldn’t simply jujitsu the three younger thugs.
Good thing there was no mandatory storage law otherwise he, his wife, and granddaughter might be dead. But of course his death would be OK. Better that than someone defend themselves with you know, the best available weapon possible.
Or maybe this 73-year old grandmother was also compensating for the size of her penis?
I’m certain there was no need for this geriatric to lower herself to using a gun, she should have gone all MMA on the intruder.
A firearm doesn’t need an alternate use. Self defense and the defense of loved one’s is all that is needed.
@Jack: Sorry, that last link for the grandmother should have been:
@Jack: Grandfather link:
Now Jack is a real gun cult devotee. You can almost feel the sexual tension coming off of him as he strokes away.
@Loviatar: Yep, just compensating for the size of my penis, and compensating for the diminutive size of most liberals brains.
A quick public service announcement in these days of increased lawlessness, federal encroachment on constitutional limits, and crybaby progressive whininess in general,–there are those people who want to pretend the 2nd amendment doesn’t exist or at least try to misinterpret it to the best of their ability.
@michael reynolds: and keep the local teacher’s union in power- don’t forget to throw that in there.
and let’s blame inanimate objects for the insane behavior of some of the kids while we’re at it.
@bill: LIBERAL LOGIC 101
We are advised by “Liberals” to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few
but we are encouraged by “Liberals” to judge ALL gun owners by the actions
of a few lunatics.
You’re so full of shit, Michael. It’s a conspiracy on the part of the government to keep real estate prices propped up so…………property taxes will be propped up.
There, fixed it for you.
You don’t have kids in school, do you? The grades pressure is bottom up from parents.
@TheoNott: Thank you for trying to derail the troll feeding session. I’m sorry that it didn’t work.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I don’t blame the gun. I blame whoever let a 14 year old kid have unsupervised access to a gun. I just want gun owners to be responsible for their guns.
And by responsible, I mean legally responsible. Negligent homicide seems like the appropriate charge, along with civil damages owed to the families of the victims.
Very sad events.
The commentary here only invites despair.
White on White violence in America is out of control. American Caucasians are twice as likely as their European counterparts to kill someone. Why isn’t the media addressing their propensity to kill each other? Where’s the resident trolls when you need answers?!?!?!? /Sarcasm off
FYI: The shooter is an active member of the Tulalip tribe and there are many arcane laws that keep tribal law ahead of US law. That may make any argument about guns a moot issue. Sovereign tribes, etc.So- it is also being reported that the gun was legally purchased but we don’t know by whom.
@Gustopher: Wait a goddamn minute for this whole comment section you’ve blamed guns and said a gun is only for killing FACT!
@wr: Like yourself?
Still can’t master the use of block quotes?
It crack me up that Jack and John425….the ninnies who have been $hitting their pants I’ve Enola…are so f’ing tough when it comes to penile enhancement.
Talk about lack of self-esteem.
After reading some 85 comments I see the usual conservative panty-waisted Fear of Everything.
If we can address the root cause – irrational fear – we will address a host of other problems.
Maybe there is some sort of confidence-boosting therapy we can give to conservatives at scale?
It’s funny how every time there’s a shooting our self described 1%er comes to lecture about how easy the problem is to solve. Mandatory gun safes, no problem, he can have another one delivered Tuesday. “Safe guns”, cool gadget, and not more expensive than an Iphone 6. Gun shows, too crowded, and he can afford to pay retail. And all this talk about personal safety, his gated community has excellent 24/7 security.
The rest of us just need to work harder so we can afford our rights too.
Do you also advocate for disbanding the armed forces and relying on a citizen army to defend the country? Because if you don;t your cartoonish notions about what the second amendment are all about, from the point of view of the framers is a best uninformed and at worse tratiourious.
Objections to a Standing Army. (Part I)
Objections to a Standing Army. (Part II)
Do you also interpret other parts of the constitution literally? Like for instance the part where is says that the federal government can regulate interstate commerce. Are you one of those people who simply assumes that there has to be a limiting principle governing that particular enumerated power despite there being no such indication in the text that there is a limit whatsoever?
Why is it that the 2nd amendment is the only part of the constitution that anyone feels should be interpreted on a textualist basis. I mean every other right is put to the test of whether or not it infringers on other rights except the 2nd (for some people anyway).
There should be regulations outlining the responsibility gun owners have in exercising their right and it would look a lot like data security. We know there there is no foolproof way to secure private data, but it does not absolve yourself of taking reasonable steps to secure your weapon. If the gun this kid used was taken from his parents, and the gun was found during the course of the investigation to not have been stored in a secure fashion, the owner of that gun should be, at the very least, be cited for negligence. Regulations of this type would nither run afoul of 2nd amendment guarantees or unreasonable search and seizures despite the paranoid fantasies of gun “enthusiasts”.
Well, we now know where he got his gun. His parents gave him the gun for his birthday. Here is his Instagram post (hat tip Taylor Marsh) thanking his parents for giving him the bestest toy a boy could have!
Now can we get agreement that giving a rifle to a middle school boy is a most inappropriate gift and probably should be prohibited? Nope-the NRA is cool with kids and guns. Kids down to 5 years old.
The idea is now set in stone in NRA propaganda that gunsr’fun-cool playthings that only nasty girlyman liberals have a problem with. Thus, everyone should have guns! And they should be able to carry them everywhere-the bar, the church, the playground, the middle school.
Well, we now see how that plays out in real life. A middle school, rejected by a girl, thinks his life is over. That’s commonplace, but then he has a Second Amendment solution to hand-and he makes it so, for him and the girl and others close by.
@stonetools: “Now can we get agreement that giving a rifle to a middle school boy is a most inappropriate gift and probably should be prohibited? Nope-the NRA is cool with kids and guns. Kids down to 5 years old.” Depending on the kid and who the parents are. There are many competitive shooting kids his age who have not killed a single person, the parents messed up here for sure by not getting him checked out to see if he had any mental illness, a background check would not have stopped this(since it’s already illegal for a 14 year old to buy a gun)
“Well, we now see how that plays out in real life. A middle school, rejected by a girl, thinks his life is over. That’s commonplace, but then he has a Second Amendment solution to hand-and he makes it so, for him and the girl and others close by.” and if he had stabbed someone you would not be calling for ridiculous background checks on knifes? would you? Probably not.
Just out of curiosity, how many parents do you know who have had their non-symptomatic teenagers “checked out for mental illness’?
What should they have done to “check him out”? Please be specific.
@Rick DeMent: “There should be regulations outlining the responsibility gun owners have in exercising their right and it would look a lot like data security. We know there there is no foolproof way to secure private data, but it does not absolve yourself of taking reasonable steps to secure your weapon.” What is reasonable? having the police search homes based on a broad warrant saying “SOMEONE GOT A GUN”
“f the gun this kid used was taken from his parents, and the gun was found during the course of the investigation to not have been stored in a secure fashion, the owner of that gun should be, at the very least, be cited for negligence” Then they wouldn’t and anyone who had their gun stolen wouldn’t be able to own a gun because it was stolen and used in a crime they didn’t commit and would therefore be punished and considered criminals thanks to that
“Regulations of this type would nither run afoul of 2nd amendment guarantees or unreasonable search and seizures despite the paranoid fantasies of gun “enthusiasts”.” Yeah actually if their gun is stolen and used in a murder then they’d be charged(under the law you advocate) and would not be able to own a gun due to the fact they had their gun stolen and used in a crime they did not commit. There would be unreasonable search and seizures due to the fact that the warrant would be broad and that person had not commit a crime but only owned a gun and say was on medication
@anjin-san: I don’t know however with the mass shootings we have seen many people not just parents miss many opportunities to have that person committed. Yes we need to find out what makes people snap and there are many things one of whom being prescription drugs that are not advised very well
So what you are trying to tell us is that you don’t have a clue of a clue about mental health issues. Trying to get someone committed is like trying to push a boulder uphill while playing the harmonica. They don’t “miss many opportunities” because the opportunities are almost nonexistent.
That is quite apparent. So why are you peppering you comments about this important issue with nonsense statements on a subject you know nothing about?
@anjin-san: “So what you are trying to tell us is that you don’t have a clue of a clue about mental health issues. Trying to get someone committed is like trying to push a boulder uphill while playing the harmonica. They don’t “miss many opportunities” because the opportunities are almost nonexistent.” Didn’t say that and how do you know? That is true in some cases yes which is why we need better mental healthcare, yes?
“That is quite apparent. So why are you peppering you comments about this important issue with nonsense statements on a subject you know nothing about?” again you butchered what i said
Are you just incapable of reading? Straw man … never said anything like this, I said that if, during the investigation, the owner of the gun did not store the gun irresponsibly, then they would be held liable. I’m starting feel like you are a scripted bot, or else just very low on the cognitive spectum.
No you are wrong, you simply are incapable of anything at approches reading comprehension, so this will my last to you since you are not arguing in good faith.. That is exactly why I brought up data security. No one is held liable if it is found that reasonable steps are taken to protect the data. Same thing with guns, an owner is only prosecuted if, in the course of a lawful investigation, the guns were found to be insufficiently secured. Same thing with stolen guns. It needs a crime to fail to report stolen guns. There would be no unreasonable search and seizures, none nada … go try and scare someone else. Go on, go play with your friends.
One other thing … giving a gun to a minor is not the issue, giving it to them and failing to secure the weapon from them is very much an issue. I grew up in a house with guns, lot’s of them, I was never allowed to access them without supervision in middle school.
How so? You were quite clear:
I’ve been through all this with a close relative. 5150’s, 5250’s, involuntary commitment, meds compliance, meds non-compliance, psych wards, mental hospitals, country clinics, psychiatrists. The works. I go to county mental health board commission meeting, and more.
So yes, I know WTF I am talking about.
Please explain how I “butchered” what you said and clarify your remarks.
Whoops, missed closing a blockquote. My bad, so its tricky. It’s still worth figuring out, Nameless.
Bingo. We had guns in the house when I was a kid. They were secured at all times, and I never touched them without my dad being there (he was an experienced gun safety instructor)
@Rick DeMent: And how are they going to be held liable? please i’d like to know because more then likely they will not be able to own a gun since they would be charged in a crime they did not commit.
“That is exactly why I brought up data security. No one is held liable if it is found that reasonable steps are taken to protect the data. Same thing with guns, an owner is only prosecuted if, in the course of a lawful investigation, the guns were found to be insufficiently secured.” Yeah and if they are not secured and the gun is used in a crime then the gun owner who did not commit the crime would still be prosecuted
If the kid had their gun and killed someone by definition it’s negligent homicide on the part of the parents.
Take your time dude. Spend some time googling mental health issues in the hope you won’t continue to come off like a raging ignoramus. You won’t fool anyone, but maybe you will learn something.
Don’t feel bad. The intertubes are very confusing…
No argument there.
Perhaps you could detail how the gun manufactures, the NRA, and their supporters are working to increase funding for better mental health care and services, (and research) and the concrete steps they are taking to ensure deadly firearms to not fall into the hands of folks with sever mental health issues.
Facts? “gun grabbers”?
Very talking point-ish observation.
@anjin-san: That’s like asking how Mom’s Demanding a little Action is spending their money to prevent abortion OR how the DNC is spending it’s money to prevent voter fraud.
@Rick DeMent: But that’s how stolen and lost gun laws work(fact) If a gun is lost or stolen and one doesn’t report it they get charged and are criminalized, for what? they committed no crime? but that’s how they(stolen and lost gun laws) work, gun data would be a huge violation of 4th amendment having person information without a purpose and no warrant. The fact is you are wanting to hold legal gun owners and criminalize them just as much as the person who commits the crime with their stolen gun, it wouldn’t reduce crime and only put more people in jail
@anonymous: Can we get a better gun nut? Honestly, you’re just not up to the task.
Whether it is poor reading comprehension, or you are trying to work off a script… I don’t know, you’re just not good at it. If you are one of the mythical NRA paid commenters, can we speak to your manager?
Next time, and sadly we all know there will be a next time before too long, I hope we can get a higher quality gun nut.
@C. Clavin: Why are you so preoccupied with my penis?
@Gustopher: So i’ve shown the fact that the laws that you support would do nothing to decrease crime and only hurt the law abiding(yes the ones you think should be prosecuted like someone who steals their gun and commits a crime with it) and now you’re personally attacking me? how nice
How are law abiding gun owner harmed by regulations that make it more difficult to obtain weaponry? Also, could yesterday’s tragic shooting have been reverted if the other kids had been armed?
@al-Ameda: Because only law abiding gun through background checks, which in many cases it takes up to 10 days or longer to obtain a gun(while many criminals go off the streets to buy their gun or steal it) it can also make legal gun owners surrender their own civil liberties. Law abiding gun owners get harmed by gun regulations by the fact if say someone was arrested for pot 20 some years ago or is a medical marijuana patient , had gotten in a bar fight years ago,is a illegal alien or is taking some sort of medication and is no threat to society can be denied access to a firearm. Plus as many on here have noted that they think law abiding gun owners should be charged if their gun gets stolen or they don’t report they’re gun stolen or lost and they therefore are made to be criminals and more than likely won’t be able to have access to firearms.
There’s no question that making guns more difficult to own and less common will reduce gun violence. The issue is whether it is worth doing, not if it will work.
@al-Ameda: Gun trafficking laws also hurt citizens by the fact they change many times people don’t even know the laws and pay the price
@anonymous: It’s cute you think you have demonstrated anything, other than a commitment to irresponsibility.
Hold the gun owners legally responsible for the damage that their guns do, and they will take reasonable steps to ensure that their guns are secured. Maybe not immediately, but after a few prosecutions, there will be a deterrent effect. This reduces access to “borrowed” and stolen weapons, which reduces violent crimes.
Having to file a police report for a stolen gun is not a substantial burden. And it would hit the straw purchasers — they would either be legally responsible for the damage of a large number of guns, or have somehow had a large number of guns stolen.
Why you are opposed to responsibility, who can tell? Is it not on the script you follow? Are you not very bright? Are you just terrified that you will be held responsible for your actions?
I’m a small-l libertarian on most social issues. As a rule of thumb, you should be able to do whatever you want (including own guns), but you have to contain the damage that your decisions cause, or be held responsible.
Gun enthusiasts, and gun manufacturers, have failed to contain the damage, so they need to be held responsible or have their options limited.
Yeah except for the fact they won’t be able to own guns since by your definition they would be considered criminals and have their guns confiscated(since they broke a law) and criminals could go else where such as the black market( like how illegal drugs are sold) The fact of the matter is you think you can legislate people on how they can store their guns or not without violating other liberties is baffling.
Yeah except for the fact that if that gun is used in a crime that is registered to a law abiding citizen that person would get charges and likely not be able to own guns anymore even though they aren’t a criminal.
Why you are opposed to responsibility, who can tell? Is it not on the script you follow? Are you not very bright? Are you just terrified that you will be held responsible for your actions?
@Gustopher: Gun enthusiasts, and gun manufacturers, have failed to contain the damage, so they need to be held responsible or have their options limited.
Oh really how so does it reduce crime and where has it? in chicago? new york city? washington dc? los angeles? please tell how passing these laws that would just make criminals go to the black market(like drugs) and not have them obtain guns(since most buy them off the streets)
How is a law-abiding citizen harmed by a 10 day waiting period to clear a background check to buy a gun?
My daughter and her new colleagues had to clear a comprehensive background check – two weeks – prior to being granted employment status at her organization.
Why is her required pre-employment background check not “harmful” – while requiring up to 10 days background to purchase weapons somehow “harmful”? Are law abiding people who want to purchase a gun more entitled and privileged than a law abiding college graduate seeking employment?
Well if you own a store in a really bad neighborhood or live in a bad neighborhood like south central la then yes it is harmful, also if a woman has a crazy ex bf how’s she going to defend herself(i say this because gun ownership among women has gone up 77%)
Well one is privately and done by a private company, while the other doesn’t let certain people who aren’t harmless that i named before access to a firearm for ridiculous reasons, plus it doesn’t stop say the bloods and crips from killing each other since most don’t go through background checks(according to the right wing FBI agency) and also can violate other liberties such as 4th if say you have to go through a mental screening
To summarize anonymous:
– nothing can ever stop the flow of illegal guns
– you need guns to protect yourself from the flow of illegal guns
– you should not be responsible for what happens with your gun
– any effort to make people responsible for what happens with their gun will lead to the tyrannical police state.
– having a freely available guns is well worth 15,000 deaths a year (obviously including the above shooting), and the rest of the 30,000 who die from guns each year are suicides so they don’t count.
– guns are tools, just like hammers.
@anonymous: “Well if you own a store in a really bad neighborhood or live in a bad neighborhood like south central la then yes it is harmful,”
Do you think many people end up owning a store in a bad neighborhood — or even living in one — without at least ten days’ notice?
@al-Ameda: A job is not a civil right. Her employer is likely not government.
Apples and Oranges.
Please explain how I “butchered” what you said and clarify your remarks.
Or are warmed over NRA talking points all you have?
Spoken like a man who is afraid to go out to get an ice cream cone without a deadly weapon in hand. Run awayyyyyy
@anjin-san: It’s never “in hand”.
I carry it everywhere, not just to the ice cream shop. There is a difference. I also wear my seat belt, have a fire extinguisher in my home, and a smoke detector. Car accidents and fires are unlikely either, but I’m no less prepared, cupcake.
And no less latent…
@anjin-san: This from a person that could pass for a tranny.
If only clever comebacks were as easy to come by as guns, you might have a chance when it came time to trade barbs. As it is… no.
@anjin-san: Says the guy whose arms are the size of my d1ck.
Meanwhile, the Sacramento Murderer Is a Known Illegal Alien, Cartel Member, Convicted Drug Dealer, and was Deported Twice…
I’m sure he will be held up as an example by the left as a typical gun owner and NRA member in 3…2…1…
The boyfriend should have to go through a background check too, why should he be excluded?
I don’t understand why a 10 day wanting period to purchase a gun is “harmful” while a 10 day waiting period to get a job is not harmful? In neither case are civil rights abrogated or taken away.
@wr: So apparently you haven’t been to chicago, la, dc or nyc(where strict gun laws are and gun crime is out of control)
And how has that worked in places like new york where you have conceal carry permit holders made into criminals(who have done nothing other then not knowing the laws that change a lot)
Yeah because if you are being robbed at gun point who’s going to stop that person if the other isn’t armed,the police? Except police don’t show up until the aftermath when the person is dead
If you commit cold blooded murder yes, however if it is stolen and used in a robbery then one shouldn’t have to go to jail and be stripped of their gun rights because of a criminal act that was committed with a stolen gun, but i’m glad you are honest about jailing law abiding citizens for having their gun stolen when they themselves are victims of a crime(theft)
No but of they are charges who enforces the law? The police, and what happened when you break a law? you go to jail plain and simple
What is freely available? how would a background check stop someone from killing themselves?
How do you know how a legal law abiding citizens uses their gun? because you are assuming that anyone who owns a gun is a mental case or a criminal of some sort or suicidal
@al-Ameda: A right delayed is a right denied.
If the police made me wait 10 days before I could exercise my 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th amendment rights would my rights not have been taken away?
The Second Amendment does mention “well-regulated,” and a possible 10 day wait is consonant with that.
Do you have any comparative statics to support that contention?
I’d be willing to bet that violent crime (on a per capita basis) is higher in smaller urban areas than it is in New York City or Chicago.
@al-Ameda: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state Right here
@al-Ameda: Do you even know what well regulated means? The term “regulated” means “disciplined” or “trained” Not background checks
I guess you are just going to avoid talking about mental health issues now. Way to man up.
Did you look at those statistics? The per capita data shows that DC, Louisiana, Mississippi have the highest homicide rates and, CA and Texas have similar lower rates. Also, for firearm assaults NY is well below the national average, and CA is at the average.
I’m not sure the data proves your point.
@al-Ameda: Dc which also has strict gun laws. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/20tabledatadecpdf/table_20_murder_by_state_types_of_weapons_2012.xls
It means that there very definitely can be gun regulations. A background check to determine if a person is criminal is most certainly part of well-regulates – it is a reasonable regulation.
Where does it say that in the federalist papers or constitution and i’m not talking about dc v heller where the court says guns can be regulated
Strict gun laws help, what doesn’t help is that there is so much gun supply and easy availability which enables people to get around regulation
We have a strong culture of gun ownership in this country – people see themselves potentially as John Wayne… avenging crime, preventing burglary, and so forth. It is a powerful fantasy. With over 300M guns you’d think that we would be the safest advanced country on the planet, yet we are not.
@anonymous: Well I lived in and around LA for thirty years. I’ve visited NYC a couple dozen times, Chicago only once. (Not counting the truly deadly menace that city offers — changing planes at O’Hare.) Somehow I’ve managed to survive all that without ever needing a gun.
But of course, this is just you changing the subject. You said the ten day waiting period was too onerous because of all the shopkeepers in bad neighborhoods who can’t get through a day without gunning down a couple of customers. I pointed out that it was the rare shop owner who didn’t know ten days in advance he’d own this business. At which point you started ranting about how scary it is to live in one of those places where those scary dark people live.
I’d be a lot more impressed with your arguments if you could even try to back one up.
good for you? congrats?
So what you’re basically saying is that if a store owner want to get a gun to protect himself he’s automatically going to gun down tow of his customers? what? People who own store don’t gun down innocent customers like you wish just like most legal gun owners don’t commit crimes or even fire a shot in anger, People who own stores buy guns to protect themselves from being robbed(because we all know how well a sign works,right?)
How do you know what people do with business etc? huh? I was pointing out that the police can’t stop a robbery in process(it’s happened yes) but usually when an armed robbery happens the police show up after, when did i say anything about dark people? oh yeah i didn’t you just assumed.
yeah because you’ve done such a great job at it/sarc
Too easy, it’s in The Constitution, in the Second Amendment.
Are you saying that only the Military or the Armed Forces can be ‘well-regulated’ when it comes to gun supply, whereas “The People” are free to acquire and use as much weaponry as they please without regulation?
So why are we by far the most violent country in the advanced world? It couldn’t have anything to do with our country being awash in guns, right?
@al-Ameda: You realize that the us leads also in besides gun violence it leads in knife violence and other forms of violence(according to the OECD)
Knife violence? LOL
Okay, because we are a violent country we should ignore the problem of easy access and availability to firearms.
Yeah people get robbed at knife point and stabbed to death apparently you didn’t know though.
What is easy access to fire arms? oh yeah mean how gun laws create a black market for gun buys(which is where most criminals get their guns from)
what is regulation exactly?
@anonymous: “good for you? congrats?”
Hey, clown – you made the assumption that I had never been in these terrible scary places, and that’s why I didn’t carry a gun with me every where I went. If you don’t want to be corrected, don’t make idiotic assumptions about people you know nothing about.
Don’t hold your breath. His response on mental heath issues as they relate to this tragedy was incoherent at best. When called on it he ran away.
@anonymous: “So what you’re basically saying is that if a store owner want to get a gun to protect himself he’s automatically going to gun down tow of his customers?”
What I’m saying — and what you keep tap dancing to try to avoid answering — is that your claim that a ten day waiting period is an onerous burden since people own stores in bad neighborhoods is idiotic because anyone who owns such a business knows more than ten days in advance he’s going to to own it, and thus can plan accordingly.
This was YOUR claim about why the waiting period was unacceptable, and when called on it you’ve spun off in a hundred different directions, hyperventilating about one unconnected notion to another in a desperate hope that no one will notice.
Address the point or admit you’re wrong. Be a man. Heck, you can fondle your gun while you type, if that makes you feel more secure.
Didn’t say they were scary, there are scary places yes but not every place in nyc or chicago or la is a shithole and making assumptions about people you know nothing about, this coming rom someone who basically said that a store owner would shoot two costumers or any innocent person that was innocent if they bought a gun .
How do you know what a store owner or someone who lives in a bad area knows? exactly you were saying i’m making assumptions of people i don’t know while you don’t know how people plan or know and when you buy a gun and there is a 10 day waiting period YOU WAIT for 10 tens before getting that’s how waiting periods work
For the record, over 30 years ago, in Oakland CA, I was robbed at knifepoint one morning near my commute rail station.
YET, I would hardly make the claim that knife acquisition and knife violence are somehow analogous to gun purchases and gun violence. How many times have you heard of mass knifings at schools? Do you think that there should be a 10 day waiting period for the purchase of kitchen knives? Butter knives? A comparison of knives and guns is inherently phony.
@al-Ameda: yeah knife killing 30 some people is just crazy……http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/01/world/asia/china-railway-attack/ wait a minute what’s this? http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/15/not-just-sandy-hook-china-s-terrifying-knife-attacks.html
Existentialism Alert: What is life all about, are we alone in the universe?
Do you consider a waiting period for the purchase of a firearm to be a regulation? I do.
Do you consider a law denying the sale of a firearm to mentally ill people to be regulation? I do.
Do you consider limiting the sale of automatic weapons to be a regulation? Ido.
The frequency of mass knife attacks is not equal to the frequency of mass gun attacks, so why do you continue to equate the two?
Nor for that matter is the number of knife homicides equal to those of gun homicides.
The problems associated with gun availability are far greater than those posed by knife availability – it’s not even close.
you realize mass shooting are also a fraction of violent crimes but don’t take my word just take the FBI’s
Except you have to go through a background check weather to buy a gun or if you are a federally licensed dealer. And it’s easy to buy a gun off the street and illegally(like drugs) it’s also easy to steal a gun and have someone who can pass a background check to buy a gun for a person
I understand that you see no value in background checks, however I do.
We just disagree.
I happen to believe that we are the most violent advanced country in the world, and that it is largely due to the huge supply and easy availability of guns. And I believe that the occasional periodic mass shooting is just something that is going to happen throughout a year and that we put up with it because of our national obsession with guns.
We disagree on that too.
Right, however criminals will still buy guns no matter what
What is easily available? you don’t go through a background check buying a gun from the street or stealing one(fact) The fact of the matter is our couture is very violent and we need better access to mental health care, yes? But mass shooters like aaron alexis,jared loughtner, and james holmes had no criminal background and would have passed a background check, heck aaron alexis went through a navy background check which is unbelievably strict and what happened? he passed.
Your links don’t help your argument about the relative dangers of knives and guns. The Chinese subway station massacre involved 10 people with long knives doing as much damage as one person with a gun. That and it was one instance.
The school attack ended with no fatalities. If the man were using a gun there almost certainly would have been multiple fatalities.
The two are simply not equivalent.
But the fact of the matter is people are going to kill no matter what, when someone commits a crime with a knife or any other weapon it’s the persons fault but with a gun we get people saying WE NEED MORE GUN LAWS!!!!!!!! that would do nothing are no different then drug laws
@anonymous: You are spiralling into incoherence. If you can’t even keep up the illusion of carrying on a conversation when someone challenges you on your prefab talking points, you’re not even a good troll — which is about as pathetic as it gets. Bye.
@wr: In what way? I’ve told you how background checks don’t work, i’ve told you have waiting periods work and how they wouldn’t stop robbery. And all you can come back with about waiting periods is YOU ARE INCOHERENT
Wow! You guys have waaaaayyyyy too much free time. You should get hobbies other than reading political/pop culture blogs.
By that logic there should be no laws against any weapon up to and including ICBMs, after all people are gonna kill no matter what and making it easier for them to kill more people more easily makes not one whit of difference.
Another victim of the Marysville shooting has died
Acceptable losses, eh Jack?
Of course, the ample supply and easy availability of guns has nothing to do with THAT
@Grewgills: OF course there should be laws against murder,however owning gun doesn’t=kill kids and anyone
Apparently you have no idea where criminals get their guns http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf Most don’t go through background checks
Apparently you do not think that the enormous supply of guns and easy access to weaponry is a problem at all.
Fine, we disagree.