NFT: School shooting in Marysville, near Seattle

If you don't have the greatest health coverage on the planet and you or your kid is suffering from mental illness, your fucked. Even if you have great health coverage you're probably fucked.

Do the research. You will be appalled and ashamed that the "greatest country in the world" does everything it can to ignore and systematically hide the mentally disturbed, until that individual goes on a shooting spree. Only then is it time to address that person.

The chicken has come home to roost. The system is fucking busted and arguing over hot talking points like gun control won't matter in the end.

There are broken and disturbed minds running around the streets unchecked and uncared for. And it's only going to get worse.

just health care. I'm pretty sure this particular kid was native American.
For one reason or other Natives have inordinate amounts of suicides of kids. This was sort of a kill others suicide thing. Stats bear this out in some places it is almost epidemic.

ARe they all just mentally ill…I don't think so. It has to do with culture, perceived opportunities, things like that. Pretty much for Natives it all seems a bit bleak, the future I mean. So you have a problem with your love life a thing like that it becomes the end all be all and you can think of nothing else that is important…a lll else sucks so bad.

These things happen due to mental illness in all areas with all peoples as we know. But just adding there may be a nuance to it in this specific case.

AS to gun control I don't live in Alaska but NM. And I can still probably find a article in our local paper that showed a bear breaking into a persons house, their kitchen not a mile from where I live.That same bear broke into our kids playhouse as a field mouse was living under it and it thought it could get it by getting into the door. This a while back now about 7 or so years but i just saw fresh bear tracks(abeit a juvenile bear) just 3 weeks ago. Bears live here with us always.
I carry a machete and a bat when I jog. And have a five shot hand gun(as it is lighter) for when I backpack and a shot gun with slug shot for at home.

So this self protection needing guns thing is not just a alaska thing. WE are nowhere near that remote, nor do we hunt for any of our food here, (shooting actually being outlawed in these national forests as they are just to close to homes) and being a twenty minute drive from a big city but have the same type issues as they are.

But also on that issue of gun control….we do live a 20 minute drive from half a million people. They allowed peoples to target shoot here in these forests years ago. It became a shooting range. My neighbors hours second floor where their kids slept had a bullet go right through the wall.

They were and I do not exaggerate or lie…. shooting fully automatic weapons in a parallel line to the road in a certain spot that carried school children on many school buses. A target range of sorts they had set up. This I actually saw when I was picking up my kids. Peoples are idiotic with guns.

Peoples gun usage needs to be regulated. We were very lucky we did not have a misshot or such happen and had kids hit. Peoples are to stupid to allow to use guns as they see fit. Seeing fit is with the stupid stupidly.
I came across just last year despite the outlaw of it, a person in a arroyo not 30 feet from a major marked trail, and this arroyo filled with boulders any one of which can cause a bullet to go any which way.

People are stupid like as not we need regulations. We also however need guns quite often in many places they are for self protection. So guns are needed as well.
I may be able to protect myself with a gun and machete a family member may need a shotgun.

In comment 11940648 ron in new mexico said:

Quote:

just health care. I'm pretty sure this particular kid was native American. For one reason or other Natives have inordinate amounts of suicides of kids. This was sort of a kill others suicide thing. Stats bear this out in some places it is almost epidemic. ARe they all just mentally ill…I don't think so. It has to do with culture, perceived opportunities, things like that. Pretty much for Natives it all seems a bit bleak, the future I mean. So you have a problem with your love life a thing like that it becomes the end all be all and you can think of nothing else that is important…a lll else sucks so bad. These things happen due to mental illness in all areas with all peoples as we know. But just adding there may be a nuance to it in this specific case. AS to gun control I don't live in Alaska but NM. And I can still probably find a article in our local paper that showed a bear breaking into a persons house, their kitchen not a mile from where I live.That same bear broke into our kids playhouse as a field mouse was living under it and it thought it could get it by getting into the door. This a while back now about 7 or so years but i just saw fresh bear tracks(abeit a juvenile bear) just 3 weeks ago. Bears live here with us always. I carry a machete and a bat when I jog. And have a five shot hand gun(as it is lighter) for when I backpack and a shot gun with slug shot for at home. So this self protection needing guns thing is not just a alaska thing. WE are nowhere near that remote, nor do we hunt for any of our food here, (shooting actually being outlawed in these national forests as they are just to close to homes) and being a twenty minute drive from a big city but have the same type issues as they are. But also on that issue of gun control….we do live a 20 minute drive from half a million people. They allowed peoples to target shoot here in these forests years ago. It became a shooting range. My neighbors hours second floor where their kids slept had a bullet go right through the wall. They were and I do not exaggerate or lie…. shooting fully automatic weapons in a parallel line to the road in a certain spot that carried school children on many school buses. A target range of sorts they had set up. This I actually saw when I was picking up my kids. Peoples are idiotic with guns. Peoples gun usage needs to be regulated. We were very lucky we did not have a misshot or such happen and had kids hit. Peoples are to stupid to allow to use guns as they see fit. Seeing fit is with the stupid stupidly. I came across just last year despite the outlaw of it, a person in a arroyo not 30 feet from a major marked trail, and this arroyo filled with boulders any one of which can cause a bullet to go any which way. People are stupid like as not we need regulations. We also however need guns quite often in many places they are for self protection. So guns are needed as well. I may be able to protect myself with a gun and machete a family member may need a shotgun.

Ron, excellent post.

I thank you for not being a weapons right terrorist.

Your story about the stray bullets in your neighbor's house is both dumbfounding and haunting. It surely underscores the need for weapons access and usage to be more striclay regulated.

the consequences of unrestricted gun usage by stupid peoples.

People nowadays are like as not stupid. Blame the educational system or whatever they just do not think.
Both sides are wrong in this. Guns are needed in many by geographical consideration most part of America. Guns also need to be regulated as people are that stupid.

This kid…. guns are part and parcel of native americans culture, all those that are not urban. A gun is always at hand, it is like a wood burning stove also present in most homes just a thing you learn how to handle and live around safely.
That kid in Sandy hook was plainly insane. Should his mom have allowed him access to guns..heck no. This kid probably not what we consider in the way of things insane at all. Coming from a culture with problems and guns being inherently available in that culture, it caused a tragedy.

Both sides glom onto this with ideologs pushing agenda. On one side …no regulation. On the other no guns at all ever.
The problem is with the ideologs not with the thing. It is a thing with much nuance and the truth of the best handling of it lies in the middle what is most practical for most cases. Not perfect but what works the best for most.
And in exceptional unusual circumstances which are not the norm as with this kid coming from a unusual culture in America a perhaps unusual consideration of the issue.

The tragedies will continue until we become less ideological on this and more practical. Here with shots coming into houses, I personally heard shots sail over my house as I live near a picnic ground and that is where it was easiest to shoot, and nevertheless the damage to people potentially it would cost me 15K or so to replace a roof shot up. How can you live if that is allowed? It did not happen but that is just lucky.

Gun rights own em shoot em when we want…..B.S.
Don't own them at all and when a bear comes in my kitchen window I should what….yell at it? B.S. as well.

This is not rocket science this is mostly easy to solve. Guns are easy to live with and regulate.

I doubt someone could come up with a more inflammatory, less contructive, and more idiotic phrase. But then along comes kepler.

The issue, as ron alludes to, is that the country is longer governed from the middle. Reasonable incremental regulation is opposed from fringe gun elements, while the opposite fringe spends its time jousting with useless concepts like the "gun culture".

What we need is a roadmap that accepts that guns will be present in society, while at the same time increasing requirements for training, purchasing and storing.

I continue to think that a useful economic lever to pull would be taxes that increase the cost to purchase, even under existing standards, any type of firearm. The incremental revenue could be used to fund buybacks in certain areas.

specific to my area the situation became so bad we had the forest service hold public meetings on it. I went to the meetings but really as there were so many others didn't have to say a word, actually curiously the most vocal forceful arguments were put on by the real estate community. You can't see homes and make much profit if you live by a wonderful forest but it is a shooting range as well. You need a safe place for kids to grow up for one. Not to be dodging bullets…and yes it was coming to that.

The forest service then put in place as the community was so outraged a special order that says for the protection and safety of the community you may not shoot ever in this forest except to protect yourself from a animal attack or some such thing. It is renewed every two years.

The NRA says this is always a step to outlaw all guns this type of thing. It was after all the federal government the local forest ranger who held and conducted these talks. He outlawed all use, even paint balls.

No no no….it was that and remains that. WE all have guns here I think each and every one of us for the reasons mentioned. No one has come to take our guns nor proposing that we be suffered more regulations….they are not necessary. The county also disallows target shooting overall. You go to a range to do that. Pay a small fee and you shoot. Only cheap worthless B*&^%$ want to target shoot for free and endanger other people and property.

This kid sad but I see really considering the cultural context little could have been done in the way of mental illness to identify him.
In this specific considering things as they are….I would probably consider metal detecters by the school entrance.
Arm teachers and all that….B.S. It takes training and a certain type of person to shoot another. Teachers are just not those type peoples, Occasionally but not normally. A occasional one who is and who is trained able to carry…I guess. But really that is very rare you will find a teacher in say a elementary schools who it like that. Other than that specific guns by teachers the chances are it will be mishandled some kid will get into it and a tragedy will then ensue. and if a shooter ever comes in…they will like as not shoot themselves some poor innocent just walking around as the shooter.

Teachers are not cops. It is hard enough to just get good teachers nevertheless teachers qualified in weaponry….that is really just silly.

you put a metal detector by the entrance. Make it so the kids can only use that one main entrance. You put a teacher by the entrance or a school security guard. The guard or teacher stops any kid who tests with metal and inspects. They then call PD.

Is it perfect…heck no. There are fully plastic guns and if you really had about a year or so to search and whatnot you could even find bullets which will not register on a metal detector.


But is is not perfect in this community it would work perfectly. This is just a kid who was love sick saw what was happening all over and being a kid stupid and depressed he decided to try it. That is all this type school will probably ever see. Not a idiot sevant who will plan a attack years in advance, a totally insane person. The screening for insane like that sandy hook kid should catch that nut job.

So it varies what we should do but does indeed lie in the middle and varies by threat type anticipated and local culture.

some sanity. You have good points, with good insight and some real life experiences.

I see no reason that training cannot be a requirement for a purchase. I think most states require a hunter safety course to get a hunting license. So why not a license for sport shooting or self defense.

So how you do that retroactively, idk.

I will stop short of saying many without further research - require training for a pistol license (CT, being one, six week course, once a week). Long guns require no such course in CT, for reference.

specific to reservations and native americans and all that, and many places in the rural culture. You just grow up around them. It is not like you go somewhere at a certain age and then buy one and could then get trained in it.

It is more like common ownership and use than personal. If say you have cattle and you drive around you may keep a rifle with you in your pick up, if you see a coyote hanging around and you have young calfs you may shoot it..they kill them. You going home put the rifle in the house maybe in a corner or some place you keep them. But if your son or daughter is feeding the sheep or some such kept around the house they may get the same gun if they see a coyote around and shoot it also. They eat sheep.

This is like going on since the kids were perhaps 9 or so. At the first time they can physically pick up the rifle and shoot it. Without dropping it and shooting themselves. Handguns are pretty unusual in this context. And how much can you train a 9 year old in a formal class which really has to be done at home. So then when they turn 18 go train them? This kid for instance was like 14.
Gun usage at that age on the res…old hat he has down it probably for 5 years or so.

And rural cowboy culture type thing it is the same as on the res. I don't know this particular kids res where he lived but it may well be like this.

Generally every specific requires a different response. What you say may be perfectly appropriate for a young kid in the suburbs or city, who goes hunting with his or her dad once a year. Maybe his folks are into the hobby of target shooting then that would also apply. Train them first, then take them out and perhaps have that concurrent with the gun purchase, their first gun.

Other places that would be totally out of context for them. these other places the gun is a tool like a rake or shovel. In city or suburban it is a hobby.

So blanket rules they usually don't work is my point. Good point yours and I agree in some contexts that is preferable, the NRA in fact(who to my opinion totally suck on the gun law thing) is actually pretty good on the training part when to and by who.

But the NRA doesn't know a single bit about really the completely rural perhaps reservation context. Mostly they may be rurally based but really such context nowadays cowboys and reservations are not their membership.
Urban cowboys only their membership reflects really. Maybe hobbyist farmers or ranchers to my opinion..another context.

So it is quite complex this thing and the various responses to it. This kid native as he was I am a bit familiar with it.
Due to culture really he would never be identified as having mental illness. A physical impediment such as a metal detector with a monitor, or some similar set up I think is the only real way in this specific.

presenting in various ways. It is so close to me I keep a copy of the special order of the forest service on my bulletin board. A exception is in it for certain religious practices of the Isleta tribe. They have lands here they use for religious purpose. I just looked at it. It is just above my desktop.

I am not familiar with them but did attend a Navajo religious ceremony three years ago, that is used to get demons out of those who have certain medical problems. In this one, shooters with rifles are spread out on the corners of a certain direction. At a certain part of the ceremony the spirit is chased out and the shooters shoot the rifles to scare it away so it will not come back.

Keep in mind this kid he came from that type of environment where a rifle may even be a part of a religious ceremony. You won't see that in church ;)

So it is just so different we can't really have blanket rules in most context like this.

In comment 11940891 Rob in NYC said:

Quote:

I will stop short of saying many without further research - require training for a pistol license (CT, being one, six week course, once a week). Long guns require no such course in CT, for reference.

I just got my LTC (license to carry) in MA, and I had to take a one-day (really 4-hour) basic firearm safety course. no restrictions. I did have to go through a criminal background check and pass all their requirements, and then it's still up to the discretion of the local police chief to allow the license or not.

I wouldn't mind more requirements - safety training, insurance, lock purchase, and liability as a gun owner to help prevent unintended consequences of my licensed firearm (firearms eventually).

this guy does so much and has so many in the way of experiences he is just full of crap.

I know it would sound like that but no it is my context. That ceremony was done for my son in laws mother. A real big deal in the community it took a week to perform about thirty or so people with a medicine man, with the climax being the last day with the shootings of the rifles. I am not native but married into it(since divorced) but my kids are and continue with the traditional ways in part.

So nuance is present with this thing of guns most have never before even heard of. We know largely only our own things.

How can you overtly outlaw them or overtly allow them everywhere always…we can't do either by my take.

is reasonable responsible and conforming to the law…
He would be safe with a gun in any context.
Others are quite not that description…..as many are out there that quite suck and will and do put others at risk, Crazy people as well.

There is a middle ground on this thing but it must be nuanced to context we find them in.

In comment 11940916 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

In comment 11940891 Rob in NYC said: Quote: I will stop short of saying many without further research - require training for a pistol license (CT, being one, six week course, once a week). Long guns require no such course in CT, for reference. I just got my LTC (license to carry) in MA, and I had to take a one-day (really 4-hour) basic firearm safety course. no restrictions. I did have to go through a criminal background check and pass all their requirements, and then it's still up to the discretion of the local police chief to allow the license or not. I wouldn't mind more requirements - safety training, insurance, lock purchase, and liability as a gun owner to help prevent unintended consequences of my licensed firearm (firearms eventually).

I agree with all of that, but what I struggle with is that ultimately we are legislating against random chaotic events - none of your reasonable incremental legislation (which I would support) would have kept the gun out of Lanza's hands.

In comment 11940933 Rob in NYC said:

Quote:

In comment 11940916 pjcas18 said: Quote: I agree with all of that, but what I struggle with is that ultimately we are legislating against random chaotic events - none of your reasonable incremental legislation (which I would support) would have kept the gun out of Lanza's hands.

It would have likely changed the type of weapons accessible to Lanza.

But no, gun laws aren't the key to the Sandy Hooks or Columbine's - the issue is one of mental health and culture - I honestly believe cable news has a hell of a lot more to do with mass shootings than guns.

These sorts of incidents were few and far between prior to the 90's - there is a relation between these mental illnesses and the idea of wreaking havoc and knowing that everyone in America with a TV is going to know about it. It is a bizarre form of self-serving terrorism.

And it's here to stay.

That's not to say that pursuing reasonable gun laws isn't a worthy pursuit. Our national gun death and gun homicide rates are awfully high (though dropping in recent decades on a per-capita basis). Sadly, it's become nearly impossible to have a rational discussion on guns in this country.

In comment 11940088 buford said:

Quote:

In comment 11938966 BeerFridge said: Quote: Nah, you could have a buy back plan and stop the sale and manufacture of guns - other countries have done that with great success. Guns would become a lot more expensive and hard to obtain for disgruntled assholes who are approaching psychotic breaks. But the unicorn fart would be getting the 2nd Amendment defect removed from the constitution. Doesn't get more Utopian than that.

Not at all Utopian, or you don't understand the meaning of the word. This is an actual thing that has happened in other countries and worked. The second amendment currently prohibits doing the things that have worked elsewhere.

Guns are incredibly efficient and dangerous devices designed to kill. If you create a society where there is basically one gun per person in the US, you increase the odds of shit like this happening. Or accidental death from handguns. Or fights that escalate to murder. Or suicide. It's just fucking mathematical probability.

often leads to idiots on both sides spewing nothing but hatred. I think most legal gun owners are not dangerous citizens, and are the ones who know how to safely own a gun. Most of gun related violence in this country is from people that are not legally allowed to own/use the gun that was used.

With that said, more can be done to limit the accessability of guns.

Most of the times, these types of dicussions attract the extremes, and many of the middle of the road sorts, just choose not to get involved.

In comment 11941749 BeerFridge said:

Quote:

In comment 11940088 buford said: Quote: Guns are incredibly efficient and dangerous devices designed to kill. If you create a society where there is basically one gun per person in the US, you increase the odds of shit like this happening. Or accidental death from handguns. Or fights that escalate to murder. Or suicide. It's just fucking mathematical probability.

eh, if you look at police/fbi statistics, you'll see guns are not very efficient if the measuring stick is that they are designed to kill.

In comment 11941929 Jon from PA said:

Quote:

In comment 11941749 BeerFridge said: Quote: In comment 11940088 buford said: Quote: Guns are incredibly efficient and dangerous devices designed to kill. If you create a society where there is basically one gun per person in the US, you increase the odds of shit like this happening. Or accidental death from handguns. Or fights that escalate to murder. Or suicide. It's just fucking mathematical probability. eh, if you look at police/fbi statistics, you'll see guns are not very efficient if the measuring stick is that they are designed to kill.

Well, compared to other modes of killing people.

In comment 11941668 x meadowlander said:

Quote:

In comment 11940933 Rob in NYC said: Quote: In comment 11940916 pjcas18 said: Quote: I agree with all of that, but what I struggle with is that ultimately we are legislating against random chaotic events - none of your reasonable incremental legislation (which I would support) would have kept the gun out of Lanza's hands. It would have likely changed the type of weapons accessible to Lanza. But no, gun laws aren't the key to the Sandy Hooks or Columbine's - the issue is one of mental health and culture - I honestly believe cable news has a hell of a lot more to do with mass shootings than guns. These sorts of incidents were few and far between prior to the 90's - there is a relation between these mental illnesses and the idea of wreaking havoc and knowing that everyone in America with a TV is going to know about it. It is a bizarre form of self-serving terrorism. And it's here to stay. That's not to say that pursuing reasonable gun laws isn't a worthy pursuit. Our national gun death and gun homicide rates are awfully high (though dropping in recent decades on a per-capita basis). Sadly, it's become nearly impossible to have a rational discussion on guns in this country.

People in general get far to hung up on the type of gun, without any understanding, which is why we end up with legislation based on purely cosmetic factors, which is a waste of time and only makes politicans look like they accomplished something.

but have yet to find what sort of protection this HS has. WE cannot make our schools into armed camps, really the NRA suggestions on having teachers being weapons experts is just absurd considering people get into teaching for totally opposite motivations and few are able to be weapons trained.

But considering the normalcy of guns in the native american culture as I describe, a metal detector and someone to watch it when the kids come in would make a lot of sense. Again it is not perfect you could still play the system but the perception of monitoring would likely stop this sort of thing from happening in the school. He would still likely do it but choose another place in the community.But schools since they have largely defenseless kids should be more safe than other places.

Gun control in this specific…this kid had nothing which would throw up a red flag on mental illness..virtually nothing.

In comment 11940220 buford said:

Quote:

In comment 11940156 kepler20 said: Quote: Defeatist. Weapons toting neanderthals refuse to have a serious dicussion with regard to why their weapons consistently fall into the wrong hands. Children die Officers senselessly targeted and killed in cold blood High school children die And all of these weapons toting hoodlums continue to sit on their hands and utilize the guise of the constitution as a means to continue stocking up their weapons while more and more innocent people die. I don't own a gun, although I'd like to, for personal protection. But rhetoric like the stuff you are spouting here is why there is no consensus on guns. If you want to call us Neanderthals or hoodlums, you aren't going to get anywhere. You are a big part of the problem. Personally I think parents who let their kids drive are worse: Quote: Teenage Driver Facts: Deaths. Each Year over 5,000 teens ages 16 to 20 Die due to Fatal injuries caused Car accidents. About 400,000 drivers age 16 to 20 will be seriously injured. Link - ( New Window )

No parallel or argument is more specious than pointing out car deaths in a gun control argument. I don't even think I'm being hyperbolic in saying that.

In comment 11941929 Jon from PA said:

Quote:

In comment 11941749 BeerFridge said: Quote: In comment 11940088 buford said: Quote: Guns are incredibly efficient and dangerous devices designed to kill. If you create a society where there is basically one gun per person in the US, you increase the odds of shit like this happening. Or accidental death from handguns. Or fights that escalate to murder. Or suicide. It's just fucking mathematical probability. eh, if you look at police/fbi statistics, you'll see guns are not very efficient if the measuring stick is that they are designed to kill.

Really? Is there some other object that has a higher rate of success when it is utilized in an attempt to kill?

Why do so many pro gun people always seem to dismiss the ability of the gun? If they suck so bad, why want one?

like this kid possibly came from…. he was native american….guns are never approached in the context of killing peoples.

In a urban environment or suburban….that is all they are for.

Mostly they are carried to protect your livestock with. This is why the cowboys carried guns and still do if you go to places like the Pecos wilderness in New Mexico. It is not even remotely connected to protection or shooting peoples. The coyotes gang up and will take on young cattle. So they shoot them to protect them. Rez out on the rez even if he did not personally live their his family comes from their and this is the context of that there.

Again in this context a gun is a tool to do something nothing more. Kill yes but likely a coyote or perhaps a rattler.

So kids having access to them and all that….my suggestion remains.

for gun control yesterday. 6 women, ages 28 to 77, passed their Florida concealed carry course.

We put on FREE concealed carry courses for women at a friend of mine's house who is a instructor. He never charges. He puts them on for cops, firemen, etc. Yes, cops have to go through the course in order to walk into a gun store and buy a weapon without a waiting period.

Already have another 2 interested.

In comment 11943228 ctc in ftmyers said:

Quote:

for gun control yesterday. 6 women, ages 28 to 77, passed their Florida concealed carry course. We put on FREE concealed carry courses for women at a friend of mine's house who is a instructor. He never charges. He puts them on for cops, firemen, etc. Yes, cops have to go through the course in order to walk into a gun store and buy a weapon without a waiting period. Already have another 2 interested.

Now that right there is something I can get behind.

As long as we are going to support easily accessible guns, I wish we'd mandate a training course before the gun even winds up in the purchaser's cold, living hands. Not only would they be obviously be more educated, perhaps more careful, and possibly more respectful towards guns, but they could possibly be more likely to be noticed by an experience firearm instructor as someone ubfit to handle or own a gun.

has open carry which I don't think Florida has.

WE may carry guns everywhere excepting where guns are normally prohibited, as long as they are openly displayed.

So concealed carry here…is a bit of a joke to me. Though we have that here to. I mean what is the significance of that if you legally can open carry.

Bunches of people do I see it all the time. I do when backpacking.
Seems to me way better than concealed carry.
Just my opinion though.

Which means it isn't only guns.

By the way, our reses have their own laws also.

See no reason for public open carry except to flaunt that you can.

Don't think of Florida as Disney and beaches.

You wold be sorely mistaken.

IMHO

can make people behave far more reasonably that concealed carry to my observation. They are just more polite. Which to my opinion is not a bad thing in todays world.

Few I think are carrying them to show off. My 80 year old neighbor always carried openly, he didn't give a capital F on what people thought, he walked on the trails and needed it to protect from animals….so why not?

I don't as I'm not that old yet but when I am I expect I will as well. In a bad area probably as well…old people are targets. They will not F with you if you open carry.

You knew that.

Your in the woods, everyone is open carry. That is everywhere.

I'm talking the citizens who have to have a rifle slung over their shoulder while grocery shopping.

That's just pushing the issue.

but a open handgun in a holster…people will not f with you guaranteed.

I'm not that old yet but fully intend to do exactly that when I am. Old people are targets. I don't anticipate ever using it but it will discourage any from trying.

Prevents a incident from occurring. They see it they don't even hazard the chance. It's unfortunately in this day and age how we have to act if perceived vulnerable.

for all states to have open carry. Prevents things from happening. Don't know how to use one keep it unloaded then. None knows if it is or not. So they don't hazard it.

Concealed way way different. Prevents nothing really. Criminals assume no gun that's why they act as they do. They target who they think has not a gun.
So I have one I may actually have to use it. I really don't want to do that.
Open probably that will never happen.

.
law abiding gun owner kills family just after he decides to no longer abide laws. - ( New Window )

related to mental health.

Perfectly sane people kill their daughter and granddaughter every day.

In comment 11944688 ctc in ftmyers said:

Quote:

related to mental health. Perfectly sane people kill their daughter and granddaughter every day.

Oh, there are crazy people out there, you say? maybe it's not a good idea to have one gun out there for every person in the US?

he was native. You even find guns being used in religious ceremonies on the rez. It has replaced other weapons used years before that. And that is common being present in differing tribes.

So most don't even know this kids context, how and when they use guns in his family and his neighbors eyes.

There was not a single indicator of mental illness prior to the incident. He was 14 but even in american culture overall 14 year olds have access to guns for hunting and such.

It is hard to admit but really sans a physical barrier of sorts, a weapons detector or monitoring there is no way to stop this,

Should we screen out those with a history of mental illness and felons from having guns certainly, and there do exist still loopholes which enable both to purchase them at gun shows in many states.
But that is just not applicable to this kid.

In comment 11944015 ron in new mexico said:

Quote:

for all states to have open carry. Prevents things from happening. Don't know how to use one keep it unloaded then. None knows if it is or not. So they don't hazard it. Concealed way way different. Prevents nothing really. Criminals assume no gun that's why they act as they do. They target who they think has not a gun. So I have one I may actually have to use it. I really don't want to do that. Open probably that will never happen.

There is so much wrong with this post I will just say that us moving forward as a civilization isn't helped by everyone carrying a gun.

metal detectors at school, aside from being expensive and inconvenient?

exactly that. They do have metal detectors..it works quite well. This kid this area with natives and all considering the culture…that is this places answer. Screening for mental illness would not have worked here. And kids that age on the Rez have access to guns always.

There is nothing wrong with carrying guns openly. A gun carried does nothing at all. In fact I mention one can even carry with it unloaded. It prevents things.
It is true this is a sad statement on the current state of society but we cannot deny it is what it is.

All those women trained in Florida if they are attacked and pull out a gun they have to probably use it. If they have a bun in a holster…they never get attacked at all.

A petite feminine woman is a target just as a old person is. Carrying a open carry gun….why not?

In comment 11944975 Randy in CT said:

Quote:

In comment 11944015 ron in new mexico said: Quote: for all states to have open carry. Prevents things from happening. Don't know how to use one keep it unloaded then. None knows if it is or not. So they don't hazard it. Concealed way way different. Prevents nothing really. Criminals assume no gun that's why they act as they do. They target who they think has not a gun. So I have one I may actually have to use it. I really don't want to do that. Open probably that will never happen. There is so much wrong with this post I will just say that us moving forward as a civilization isn't helped by everyone carrying a gun.

I may be wrong here, but I doubt that Ron is promoting everyone carrying a gun. I think he is saying that states should have open carry rather than conceal carry. I think it's a valid point. I would think that law abiding citizens that are carrying openly would be a deterrent as opposed to someone that is concealed carrying.

that is what I am saying in a indirect way.

Concealed carry leads to shootings. Open carry does not usually. Of course in most circumstance neither is necessary as most of us are not vulnerable nor being in places at which the vulnerable are at danger. Say walking through a barrio late at night.

So it is mote. But if I did feel necessary to conceal carry.. the state instead should have a open carry law like here, so I may do that and likely not have ever to shoot anyone.
They will leave you alone like as not.

concealed carry leading to shootings(as it is so statistically small these type of things) but if one thinks about it….. as opposed to open carry of course it can and will. Knowing a gun they avoid you and go to perhaps another which is unfortunate but it is how low lives act. Not knowing a gun they can and will go for you if perceived vulnerable and you then have to protect yourself and yes…shoot them.

Quote:

Concealed carry leads to shootings. Open carry does not usually.

Because I'm guessing you made it up.

made it up.

go open carry and see if anyone f(*& with you.

They will not. No stats are really necessary.

Do people f*&^ with people who are vulnerable.. yes.

So combine the two... a open carried gun makes one appear not vulnerable when a concealed carry does not…..this thing can be logically worked through.

WE should not throw logic out the window just because this is a issue of guns.


So perceived vulnerable but really not being as one has a concealed gun…one has to what? likely use the gun to protect oneself if summed up in this way by low lives who prey on the vulnerable.

No stats and not made up but thought through

out here I take someone with a concealed carry….as a bit of a joke they are pretending they are cops or DEA or whatever. If they open carry they are just another bojo with a gun nothing special about them.

But open carry here any can do it and with no special training.

The industry to my opinion wants concealed carry as they all require in every state training specific to that which requires special qualified teachers and concurrent to that every concealed carry requires usually holsters of a special sort and usually a special weapon which allows concealed carry without it making you look ridiculous.

So there are all sorts of sales made there.
Open carry if you have a handgun you can and usually require the purchase of nothing and no training specific to concealed.

Log is right I am not advocating for just going around everywhere carrying guns but if you do... your state should have open carry not concealed.
Concealed is a joke unless you are a cop or some such.
Put into place by the industry to sell things..though again there are no stats to show that.

think about it stats don't solve all our problems nor answer all our questions

some sort is really a local issue to my opinion. In cities suburbs…yes I think it should be, not so much in rural areas.But that is a personal opinion.

for a shotgun, however to legal buy and own a hand gun you must complete a pistol safety course, then you get the open carry permit (which has an extensive background screen run). There are many other additional types of training classes that are recommended, but not mandatory. Something additional to note is that you can not buy ammunition in connecticut withour either a pistol permit or an ammo permit. So even if you own a shotgun, you can not buy ammo for it here unless you have the permit.

how it is in almost all of it…that makes perfect sense. I would advocate for that living there.

IN the context of this kid here, it is more like our context than conn.here in NM we have reservations kids like that….it is similar.

Would NM laws work in Conn..heck no. Conn In NM….heck no.
Some laws have to be national such as who can purchase them the felons and mentally ill always excluded. Some have to be local or state. Some cities virtually outlaw them as it is so convoluted the process to get one and keep one and that is ok for that place. Rural places a bit more like buying a hoe or a shovel or chainsaw, still the fed guidelines but absent that,,,nothing. For reason…a gun to a city person is one thing to a country person another.

I think city people are a bit absurd on the issue but that again is personal. We had a neighbor hood meeting once where I live. A women who just moved up there was going on and on about her gun. the large caliber it was and this and that. I assume she had just purchased it. We living here for years and years..all of us have guns to protect from wild animals and used to be the sheriff he was 20 minutes away…but no one said a thing to that lady. It was like funny but we didn't laugh as it would be rude. We don't go on and on about guns we all have them, know generally how to use them and that is that. There are a thousand more things to talk about more interesting than guns. Cities they have a mystic about guns. It is BS.here


Like I say in NM concealed is a joke. In fla since they don't have open carry…no. So it depends.