Shared publicly  - 
 
An 11-year-old who brought a gun to school on Monday reportedly told students that his parents encouraged him to do so.
14
9
Joseph Cundiff's profile photoRoss Baws's profile photoAngel S's profile photoLeopold Goyer's profile photo
90 comments
 
...and then he pointed the gun at a girls head and said "I will kill you"
Something doesn't jive here.
 
Well I would too if I were his parents after hearing about the shooting in Conneticut...we need to start protecting ourselves
Tren C
+
7
8
7
 
Well done +Dan Seeley , cos if there's one thing guaranteed to make our kids safer it's more kids with guns...

 
As a Parent I understand the reason behind this but the parents did not educate the kids, They should have said only take it out to protect yourself and your classmates if there is another gun man in the school shooting kids, other then that it stays in your bag and no one is to know.
 
Wouldn't you rather just teach your kid how to react if there was a situation +Dan Seeley? Hide, duck, play dead? ANYTHING.

I can assure you no 6th grader with little gun experience is going to be able to quick draw and make contact.
 
+Tren C Yes the answer is more Guns! You start taking guns away the People that are doing this will still get Guns or anything really and hurt people. If you take away a tool to protect yourself and others it is just going to make more killings like CT. Arm all the Teachers, put in Armed Vets, or a few armed cops at schools while there are kids in the schools then there would not be anymore shootings and if there where they would not be a high body count
 
+Joseph Craven how do you know that his parents did not actually tell him that? If they did tell him, then it just proves that kids should not be given guns when they go to school because they won't be able to handle it. Or if they did not tell him, then they're irresponsible and they shouldn't be allowed to own a gun anyway. I would bet your parents told you not to do a lot of things that you ended up doing anyway.
 
Yeah, we can't have condoms in school, those are too dangerous. Let's give the kids guns - perfectly logical.
Tren C
 
Or one person will pull and there will be a chain reaction and the whole school will die. How do you tell a 6yo who they are and arnt allowed to shoot?
+Joseph Craven 
 
+Kevin Kelly I do not know if his parents told him or not. But Gun Education dose not start the first time you give your kid a gun it starts so much earlier. My Daughters have had Gun Training and I have Educated them to if I gave a them a Weapon they would do what was told to them and nothing more. 
 
+Tren C Do you really think that. That does not happen on a military base where everyone is armed. It all goes back to Training and Education not the Guns or how or who has them in the schools or anywhere
Tren C
 
+Joseph Craven a military base doesn't have children all armed and walking about freely.
It has adults who are aware of the consequences of their actions and the impact it will have on the rest of their life. (oh and green-on-blue and blue-on-blue killing happens too)
 
Or we could address the illness and quit trying to stop the symptoms. There's always that.
Tren C
 
+Travis Augustine Israel doesn't arm their teachers as far as I am aware, can you point to a source?
 
+Tren C I am not saying arm kids all I said Is I understand why Parents are doing it. I Really think Arm the Teachers or put a few Vets in school to Protect the kids
Tren C
 
Source please
 
I agree it is ridiculous to give a 6th grader a gun, but on the other hand, I can understand why a parent would encourage something like this. The point I'm trying to make is that we need to start prtotecting ourselves then things like this wont happen.
Tren C
 
Armed security is a VERY different scenario than armed students and/or teachers who have a hard enough job as it is 
 
I would consider it more of a protest than anything.  Our schools are unsafe.
 
But do you really think we have enough money to have security all over every school in America. It would be so much easier to just arm the teachers.
Tren C
 
I am willing to bet the teachers would be less excited at the prospect than you are. And forgive me if I'm mistaken but America doesn't have enough high quality teachers with reasonable pay for their current responsibilities, right?
 
When I was in school we had armed security and it was never a problem. I've also had teachers flip out on their class, curse everyone out and quit on the spot, so I have a feeling that arming teachers could be trouble.
 
+Tren C If teachers arent even making enough, what makes you think we can afford security for every school in America
 
 
When will people learn GUNS in the wrong hands is what causes death there should be strict gun laws in USA to prevent this from happening again and children have no business carrying guns. Teaching them that guns are good is the wrong thing. Guns should only be used by people who are required to use it and if u think that a 5 year or 11 year old or any child should be caarrying one there is the problem right there. 
 
Thats the problem though right?...there will always be guns in the wrong hands...thats why you put guns in the right hands so they can protect themselves
 
+Celeste Antaky Statistics show that the more gun laws in the US, the more gun crimes that occur.  If gun laws actually worked, wouldn't gun crimes being going down per capita?
 
+Adam Wyson You've committed a common correlation/causation error. Just because two things correlate does not mean there is causation. You don't know that the correlation is opposite. For example, maybe there are more gun laws because they have more gun crimes. Or maybe it has to do with poverty. The point is that a correlation proves nothing
 
I think the best part about having more guns in school is that they can only be used by Good Guys, who are identified by wearing white hats. Bad Guys (black hats) can never take the guns away and use them against Good Guys, so really, what could go wrong?
 
As an educator in Texas, I want to say teachers in our state average about $40,000 a year and our legislature is considering allowing us to carry concealed handguns. One Texas school district already permits us to arm ourselves, however, many of us hope to see it permitted state wide. 
 
+Travis Augustine That still means nothing. The pattern your talking about would be a correlation and means nothing in terms of causation.
 
No law on paper will ever protect you, or those you love, from an evil person determined to do evil things. The CT shooter killed his mother, stole her guns, and used them for an atrocity. It illustrates the point, you can make restrictions tight and inconvenient for everyone, but nothing stops an evil person from taking them from somebody that acquired them legally. You have to meet evil face to face, ask any cop or military service member. 
 
I dread the day that guns get taken away. We think it's bad now... Wait until the law abiding citizens no longer have a way of protecting themselves. The criminals/soon to be criminals will still get their hands on guns and won't have to worry about being shot at because they know everyone else is unarmed. If someone in the admin office was carrying, possibly no kids would be lost. If someone in the theater in Denver would have been carrying, we might not have lost as many lives that day.

I'm not saying people carrying is the end all, but I can guarantee that if some one pulled a gun on me or a group of people around me, I'm going to do everything I can to take them down as quickly as possible.
And that's the attitude of everyone who carries. They help keep ours and your loved ones safe where ever they are!

I know a lot of people in america are concerned about how easy it is to get a gun but if we ban them, do you think these scumbags are going to say "darn, if only I could easily buy a gun..."?

The biggest issue I see is how the media immortalizes these killers. Media isn't evil but a product of reporting the news is that it gives the killers a world stage. The next mass killer is watching the news right now getting ideas for how he can go down in history.

All we can do is take measures to protect ourselves and that includes civilians being able to carry. Not taking the right away from us!
 
+Travis Augustine I think I get what you're trying to say, but you keep citing a correlation (pattern of more gun control correlates with pattern of more gun violence) with causation (more gun control means more gun violence). I'm not really going anywhere with this. If there was evidence that gun control laws do in fact cause more gun violence I would be very interested to see it.
 
Wait, they still have educators in Texas? Is Texas still ranked dead last in education? How about we worry about arming schools with teachers before we arm them with guns. 
 
Ouch! Actually, Texas is a leader in Education and set the standards for the U.S. Textbook companies cater to us by developing their products based on our standards and we began No Child Left Behind. Perhaps you read we spend less money on education and you drew an erroneous conclusion that we are somehow "last". As we are growing by leaps and bounds, while other states are on the brink of bankruptcy, you can probably surmise that our education system is outstanding as it is one of the many things that draws people to our Great State!
 
+Mike D'Agostino I could use that exact same logic to show that guns don't cause gun crimes.  Don't be an intellectual pretzel, stick to the topic.
 
Gun was way to far if your going to take a weapon bring a small pocket knife but not a gun.
Tren C
 
Guns in the hands of good people is a good idea rebuttal:
http://melbourne-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/man-steals-psos-gun-shoots-himself/
also one presumes Nancy Lanza was a "good guy"?

Teachers are underpaid, so how would america afford security for schools rebuttal:
How would America pay to arm and train its teachers, and increase their salary to become security guards for the children while ensuring that they are also paid to be their teachers? and who will pay for the teachers health and welfare if/after they take the life of an assailant, let alone someone they accidentally shoot while shooting the assailant or if they shoot someone who was also defending the students like another teacher?
Tren C
 
that comment was highly inflammatory, and defeats the purpose of rational discussion, so I will answer what i think you were trying to acheive:

I am anti guns.
I am for the life of children.
I see the straightest path between those two to be the removal of guns.

EDIT: I never said that teachers were underpaid, merely that at their current pay it is difficult to get enough of them, and that adding further responsibilities without increasing the pay doesn't seem rational.
 
So you want to increase the death toll by 16 in mass murder sits.?
Tren C
 
I will go back up and look for those causal (not correlative) studies in this thread, as I haven't read them yet. I will take on board your suggestion that they show the causation you are implying (while also repeating my lies damn lies and statistics mantra). but it will have to wait till I have the time to truely absorb them.

I didn't mean to imply you didn't have the kids best interests in mind, of course you did.

finally, I will return very shortly with just one suggestion as to how this may work (gun control)
Tren C
 
Do I think guns can be eliminated? No
Do I think there should be more restrictions? Yes

An example: no guns permitted at all in towns with a population greater than 10000. 
While I admit it's a rather arbitrary number it requires no other changes to the perceived "rights" of individuals beyond the limitation of how they can be enacted. Just like speed limits merely describe the way in which you can drive legally.
The only exception to this rule would be storage of your weapon in your home or at a firing range. While being transported the weapon must be locked in such a way that it is not firable. Any ammunition should also be locked in a container that requires a seperate key to open.

In Melbourne (Australia) last week a train guard got hit with a hammer so that the assailant could take his gun. I mean really? why did a train guard have a gun? No guns in cities. 

"but then the only people with guns will be Criminals" rebuttal:
Exactly. then the police know exactly who to question when they identify someone carrying. "concealment" aside, police cant spend all their time on the street questioning everyone who carries whether or not they have a permit, they have better things to do. so, remove the "legal" guns.

now this is just one of many suggestions I have, some will be more effective than others, some will be met with more resistance than others, but I think plans like this alongside buy backs and amnesties where anyone who hands their weapons over in a police station wont be prosecuted even if the weapon is on an existing illegal weapon list have a really good chance at success.
Tren C
 
i beg to differ, you can own a gun. you just cant take it into a densely populated area. just the same as you can drive a car, just not over 50MPH or whatever the speed limit may be.
 
His "parents" would have to be the biggest parental failures in history. How stupid do you have to be? 
Tren C
 
I beleive I answered the first part of that in the description +Travis Augustine :/
and perhaps you could help me understand the intended definition of bear in this context, from your last comment i get the feeling you mean able to be fired at will? then surely requiring a permit to concealed carry is also an infringement on that "right"?
C Nevs
+
2
3
2
 
Was he stopped???? Yes? ok move on...people come on 
Tren C
+
2
3
2
 
some copypasta +Travis Augustine maybe you are correct and it doesn't answer your question :(

"The only exception to this rule would be storage of your weapon in your home or at a firing range. While being transported the weapon must be locked in such a way that it is not firable. Any ammunition should also be locked in a container that requires a seperate key to open."

for the record, another one of the things that would make me a lot happier with allowing people to carry is as a part of an annual testing cycle, doing a full disassemble, clean, and reassemble in front of an authorised assessor, as well as demonstration of techniques the reduce the likelihood you will be disarmed. the idea being that unlawful carriers would be less likely to learn these and therefore will not be as capable.
C Nevs
+
3
4
3
 
+Tren C
You would be surprised at how many gun owners cannot accomplish the simple task of disassembling and assembling. Or maybe your wouldn't be surprised but either way its unacceptable at the number of irresponsible gun owners. I have handled firearms for 25 years and each time I treat each firearm with respect and care. 0 exceptions. 
Tren C
 
my point exactly +Cody Nevala . mind you I think car maintenance (changing oil, tyres etc) should be a part of car ownership too....

it's a sad state of affairs when one doesnt trust the elected officials yet continues to live on that same soil. not a personal attack there mind you +Travis Augustine just a resigned sense of sadness. 
I find it a little peculiar the argument that carrying a handgun or even a rifle would help the civilian defend their country from threats foreign and/or domestic. exactly how much good would a gun do against personnel carrier, jet, nuke, police car, riot police, etc? i think if the intention was to take america away from its civilians, there is little they could do with the legal weapons that are available to them.
Tren C
+
1
2
1
 
It worries me that you think it would come to that kind of bloodshed.
I can see why you stay, and read into it that it's not as simple as moving to Canada or Mexico, sure you probably could find the cash, but you like where you are more than the idea of living there.

Can I just say, thanks for keeping it pretty much a clean discussion. And by that I mean I tire of trying to have this conversation with people who just name call and/or don't even bother trying to support with evidence. Cheers!
 
+Tren C there's one problem with your driving analogy. Driving is a privilege, owning a firearm is a right.

I'll say it again, you can't make a law that will protect you from those determined to do evil. You have to meet it face to face. 
 
+Rich Ziegler A right that was intended to be "well regulated" and possibly within the confines of a militia, but I know we ignore that part now because it's not convenient.
 
+Rich Ziegler What a bunch of malarkey. The reason why there is a second amendment is that Founding Fathers didn't want to have a huge military since they've seen what strong military can do to a state in Europe. Also since there were so many threats and dangers that owning a musket was a requirement. All of those reasons are obsolete for the last 150 years. Read your history, and for God's sake - stop watching Fox and Rush..... 
C Nevs
 
Here comes Biden with his counterpart +TIME person of the year...yuck...focused only on guns....such narrow vision, guns guns guns...how about mental health mental health an reform on that....nope. Disgusting 
 
We've proven that we don't want to pay for health care in this country - as seen by the response to the Affordable Care Act. Perhaps now we'll see Conservatives embrace it? I highly doubt it.
 
Suddenly, a call for Health Care Reform?! What a joke. Nobody is buying it - you're all just afraid of "losing your guns."
C Nevs
+
1
2
1
 
I'm not lossing shit and if you and your liberal buddies want to come take them you won't make it 2 steps on my property. Please come on and try ill be happy to help you find your way here. And fuck Obama care "Heath care reform" I'm not asking that...I disagree with his plan and always have I'm saying we here in the US have a stigma on mental health and with that comes a lack of diagnosis and treatment. 
C Nevs
 
Also I work my ass of for insurance as it is a priority...i shop around and make a decision of the coverages I want...Obama care makes me pay money for a crack whore who doesn't give to shits about her self and then goes to the ER for a hang nail. Fuck that. I'm not paying more for people who don't have priorities. 
C Nevs
 
I do support folks who are down on their luck an need a helping hand. My mother came from almost homelessness with me to being very very successful, why? Because she had goals priorities ambition and worked and worked...giving me a better life and so forth. This hand out system is a crock of shit and it empowers people to sit on their ass because "someone will eventually pay for me." That's horse shit!
 
So what you're saying is, we don't really need mental health care reform? Or if we do need it, you'll be damned if you have to pay for it? So it's just fine with you if people go undiagnosed and schools get shot up every so often so that we can maintain our un-regulated rights and nobody has to pay anything extra? Got it. Maintain the status quo.
C Nevs
 
+Jeremy Tregler
Wow ok we have had calm discussions in the past but here I am beginning to question my patience. I am simply saying that we in America need to remove the stigma attached to mental health. Don't you dare say that I'm ok or even imply by any view that I'm ok with what happened it allowing it to happen in the future. That is such is left wing nut move and looking at your post proves that! I personally have managed and controlled PTSD from Iraq and at first I felt a stigma associated with it until I talked to family and friends found proper treatment methods and personal control and responsibility I am fine...with that stigma removed from my perception it made it easier to accept treatment when it happened quite some time ago now and I function 100% like normal people with no such trauma. Let me be clear on your status quo comment...I'm probably at a much lower class than you. I work night grave yards, days or where ever a shift opens so I can make money for my family to purchase healthcare etc pay my premiums an deductibles....don't give me that shit about status quo. Look at it from my point removing the stigma will allow more non Obama care people to not be afraid to get help....or understand why someone who loves you is wanting you to get help...it have NOTHING to do with maintaining status quo...fix yourself +Jeremy Tregler an read a post before you hit enter!
 
I, too, have worked hard for what I have. I also work two shifts, and put in 60 hours a week at my current desk job. I have paid for my own health insurance since I turned 18, and to top it off, I have a "pre-existing" condition which has cost me thousands out of pocket when insurance decides that their private profit is more important than my health, or the years of premiums I've paid to them.

We need to be more accepting of a lot of things. We need to be more accepting of people with mental health issues. We should also be more accepting of gay people, and people of different faiths. If this is what it takes to boost cultural understanding, then I have to say it's been a hard road, but we'll be better as a nation for it.

I thank you for your service and sacrifice, as I thank all our veterans, including my Navy dad who had passed three years ago from cancer.
C Nevs
+
1
2
1
 
+Jeremy Tregler
I am sorry to hear about your father as well as your preexisting condition. I wish you the best. I did not say you don't work hard but on the my view I'm sure we can agree to help folks 100% but your ok working 60 hours a week an more taxes coming out for those who don't give a crap? Thanks for the Kind words and I'm glad we can get back to a civil conversation 
 
+Cody Nevala Good times. I view the taxes I pay as an insurance policy against crime and disease. In my line of work, I've had the opportunity to travel around the world, including parts that have far less than we do. (I've been to Mali, Morocco, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico and Peru, among other places.) These places have almost no public services, so disease and crime are rampant. If paying a few more dollars in taxes ensures that I can live in a healthy and safe country, I'm for it. Yes, there will be slackers, but in our system, they could be motivated to do better by the kindness and example of those who have the opportunity to help rather than kick them while they're down. I'd prefer to see our taxes used to build our own country up rather than bomb others down, and that probably makes me a "liberal." That's a title I wear with honor. Anyway, cheers.
 
Hire returning combat military personnell to serve as school police officers. Many of them have OJT in threat recognition so lets make use of that experience and in doing so we can take proactive steps to protect our schools and create jobs for returing veterans. If you think it will cost to much just ask your self what price you would place on one childs life or one teachers life or just any one life in general. This is a common sense thing to do. I wonder if our reactionary governmental reps wiil take their heads out of their asses long enough to realize it?
 
This is not a school problem, this is a societal problem. Our movie theaters, shopping malls and places of worship have also been slaughterhouses this year, in case we've forgotten. Should we have troops patrol the streets? Have we come to that?
 
+Jeremy Tregler You are right on the point. I used to live in Ukraine and even though you don't pay a lot of taxes it is very hard to get into middle class. There are no decent roads, no decent healthcare, no decent judicial system, no decent work regulations, but if you are rich - you are The King (unless you cross roads with someone richer, then you will become a bum quite soon). And Americans don't appreciate what they got, total ignorance ....
C Nevs
+
1
2
1
 
+Michael Sorensen
Couldn't put it better myself
+Jeremy Tregler
And as I had said in the past ill respect your voice an your decisions though I may not agree on everything 
 
International travel opens minds a lot faster than watching the news all day. It's one thing to read and hear about what's going on in the world, it's quite another to visit another person's home and sit down to tea.
 
Mr. Tregler, Trying to ban firearms will never fix the problem with criminals. It will only make victims more susceptible to the whims of the criminal. Mr. Laktionov, you think we are ignorant? Why don't you go back to mother Russia?
 
+Michael Sorensen  Then how come Japan has 9 gun related homicides a year to USA's 15000 ? And over there firearms are not banned, they are tightly regulated. You can own a gun but you need to pass exam, pass drug test and mental health evaluation.... 
 
I'll have to go back, but I don't think I said anything about banning firearms. I do think there should be very strict regulations on who can own one. I'm not familiar with rules around the rest of the country, but in Illinois, it's easier to buy a gun than to get a drivers license, and you can argue statistics, but one is built for conveyance and the other is built to kill. If you own a gun in my neighborhood, I want to know who you are, where you've trained, what you have, and whether or not you're medically clear to own one, otherwise my neighborhood is not safe for my family. Let's make gun ownership at least as challenging as car ownership. Take some responsibility for your weapons.
 
Mr. Tregler, are you against the idea of taking positive proactive steps to protect our schools? No you did not, as far as I know, say anything about banning a firearm but your diversion from the plain common sense thing to do, which is to actively protect our schools, says you either are for banning firearms or you have no idea what to do so which is it? Banning a firearm or even imposing draconian regulation of firearms will not protect pour schools or anyone else. Mr. Laktionov, as for what they do in Japan that is none of my business, and I do not care. That is their country and they have the right to run it the way they see fit as long as they don't try to impose their way on us. Simply put, if you like it the way they do it somewhere else then go there.
 
So we'll have really protected school, but unsafe movie theaters, shopping malls and houses of worship? You're treating the symptom and not addressing the illness.
 
+Michael Sorensen Yes, perfect solution to gun violence - more guns....  You know in Mexico there are armed with assault weapons police squads on every other corner and I guess by your logic there should be minimal violence there, right? 
 
The illness is the nature of humanity, and that is the sad truth. Mankind will ever be able to stop the proliferation of violence simply because to do so would require so much intrusion into and control of each individuals life that the system would collapse from the overload. People would not be able to function as individuals thereby becoming less productive, the tax system would suffer from the lack of revenue generated because of loss of the individual interest in work, and humanity would revert to even more violence than we currently have, such as is the problem in Mexico where the ones with the firearms are the criminals. So, the practicable fix is to not only allow but to promote personal defense and to actively protect those who can not protect them selves such as our schools. As for community places like malls and theaters and such then the immediate protection of your self and your family and friends is yours and their responsibility because in those settings the police are only available to react to not stop criminal activity. If you are worried about your personal protection then either stop going where you go or take positive proactive steps to protect your self.
 
+Michael Sorensen I see you got it all figured out, what we have is not gun violence problem - what we have is "The illness as a nature of humanity" .... I guess perfect solution for that is to get rid of humanity since we are the core of the problem..... You know what, somehow I will not be surprised if you are going to be next mass shooter, humanity must be punished for it's sins, nutjob.... 
 
+Jeremy Tregler Supreme Court says your right to own a firearm is independent of militia service, look it up
+Sergey Laktionov I don't watch the news. The constitution is deliberately vague, to allow it to evolve, and continue to protect the citizens rights from those that would do away with them under the pretense that their original purpose is outdated and thus void

As to threats being outdated, shootings in schools and movie theaters would suggest otherwise

 
Ooh, a BLOG! Well then, there's the authoritative voice I was looking for. Thanks for the clarification. As Abraham Lincoln said, "we can't trust everything we read on the internet."
 
Yes, I can see how "well supplied" could be the exact same thing as "well regulated" just as keeping my car filled with gas is the same thing as passing a drivers education course.
 
Well there we have it! Once you propose a solid positive workable solution to a liberal you get a random vague inside out up side down roundabout odd weird response that makes no sense outside the mind of the liberal contriving it but all liberals flock to it as if it were magic horse hockey. 
 
+Michael Sorensen I would be surprised if you'd followed that logic since conservatives are beyond logic. I mean for you people it makes perfect sense to blame such massacres on absence of references to god in high schools... 
 
"God is all knowing, all powerful, ever present" except in public schools. They have a special spiritual wall of protection that keeps God out, or something.
 
Jeremy,Jeremy,Jeremy pleease, God? what are you talking about?He is the reason previous generations of americans did not shoot up their schools,because they feared GOD and thus treated their neighbours well. So,Jeremy, because we are a21st c. generation,we keepGODout,worship violence and money and treat others like trash...by shooting them.God doesnt see He is illegal in school. Oh,did the devil get his marching orders from schoo when GOD did?
Add a comment...