School shooting in CA
I saw the news alerts all day and I got your emails, but I figured I’d let this one shake itself out before I’d write anything. It seems that a 16-year-old with a specific target in mind took a shotgun to school, shot a classmate after shooting at another who refused medical treatment. According to Fox News, there is an armed officer at the school, but today he was snowed in and couldn’t get there.
When the shots were fired, the teacher began trying to get the more than two dozen students out a back door and also engaged the shooter in conversation to distract him, Youngblood said. A campus supervisor responding to a call of shots fired also began talking to him.
“They talked him into putting the shotgun down,” Youngblood said.
The sheriff said that at one point the shooter told the teacher, “I don’t want to shoot you” and named the person he wanted to shoot.
The shooter may have had up to 20 shotgun rounds in his pockets, he said.
So an “assault weapon ban” wouldn’t have stopped this guy. And since he’s only 16 years old, I guess it’s safe to say he didn’t purchase the gun himself. It goes back to what I said after the Connecticut shooting, gun owners have to be responsible and lock up their guns when they don’t have them in their possession. Mine are locked up because I don’t want to help turn a common thief into an armed criminal.
Category: Guns
So, a 16yr old? In a “gun-free zone”? He can’t legally possess a shotgun, rifle or pistol. He shot at people? I wonder if our rock-climbing hero, Joey, can tell us how many laws he broke? Would another law or three have done anything to stop him?
If you due to your negligence allow a weapon you own to fall into unintended hands, and it is used in a crime like this… you should be charged as if you fired those shots yourself.
If the guns are stolen, if they had been reasonably secured then no you should not be held liable.
Define “reasonably secured”.
@3 I’d say behind a lock – including front door. If they had to break a lock of any kind to access them, that’s reasonably secured.
On the other hand, if the student had not listened to those who talked him down, things could have been MUCH worse (unless, in case, the teachers had been armed). In either case, the story would have turned out much differently.
But the school resource officer (security guy) was snowed in? Why wasn’t a replacement ordered in?
So much for the GUN FREE SCHOOL sign.
rb325th: at first blush, that sounds good. In practice, not so much. Who defines “due to your negligence” and “reasonably secured”?
Here’s a specific question: is a weapon in the drawer of a bedside table in a locked house stolen during a break-in while the owner was absent considered to have been “reasonably secured”? How about if it had a trigger lock, but the keys were in the house? Or was in a gun safe, but the safe’s keys were also in the house?
If the answer to any of those is “no”, then by the same logic we start holding the owners of stolen cars responsible for crimes committed by anyone using them after they were stolen. Ditto the owners of knives or axes who leave them in their storage shed if they’re stolen and used in a crime. Why not? A car, axe, or knife can kill someone just as easily as a gun – and cars do, many times more often, every year.
There’s a more essential problem in what you propose: you’re holding someone criminally culpable for a crime committed by someone else. The person whose gun was used in a murder may be guilty of negligence if they stored it improperly – but they did not commit murder and are not guilty of same. If they committed any crime, that crime was decidedly not murder. And, frankly, barring a law requiring firearms to be stored in some particular manner it’s doubtful whether a crime would have been committed. That would be like saying someone who left their keys in the car should be held responsible when someone stole their car, drove drunk, and killed someone. (In either case, a civil tort might be another story – juries are notorious for accepting some truly bonheaded theories about what constitutes “contributory negligence” in civil trials. See the famous McDonald’s coffee case for an example.)
Holding the tool responsible for the crimes committed by the perpetrator is ludicrous. So is holding former owners responsible for the crimes committed by others with property stolen from them.
Incoming Libtardom: Firearm owners must remove firing pins from their weapons and bury them in the backyard when not at the range.
rb325th @2 I call BS on your comment. I’ve got a rifle leaning in the corner behind my bedroom door. A few more in a gun cabinet in my living room. No one has any business coming in my house and stealing my guns. Whether my door is locked or not is not relevant. It’s my house, you keep out unless I invite you in. If someone should come in and steal my guns, they’re criminals and should be tried accordingly (or shot, if the gods are smiling). To suggest that I be held criminally liable for whatever some thief might do with my stolen guns is asinine.
Okay, you have kids and you have guns…. Look I know many of you and including myself have been around guns we could have picked up, pulled out of their cabinet, etc..as kids but we didn’t because of the fear of getting our asses rightfully whipped.
Reasonable, if it is for your home defense and you aren’t there it stays locked.
If you have an arsenal, treat it like one. You don’t want anyone being able to walk off with it or use it against you or anyone else.
If someone comes into your home and can grab a gun off the shelf, grab the ammunition, and wander off without anyone knowing they did.. you weapon was unsecured.
If someone comes in and has to cut a lock, break in, etc… then you at least had attempted to secure the weapon then you aren’t at fault that someone was able to cut the safe open, cut the lock off, obtain the ammo….
I know there is a lot of what ifs here. I know that there are very responsible kids who have used unsecured weapons to protect themselves in their homes.
I don’t know all the answers, but there is a difference between a theft and a negligent gun owner leaving it out with an engraved invitation for anyone to just pick it up and walk off with it.
I do not see more laws being the answer when it comes to guns. Gun Control is a joke, it is only a means of disarming a law abiding population. For what reasons, that is debatable… personal responsibility cannot just be dismissed
rb325th, please explain why this country seems to have an obsession with shuffling responsibility for a crime on to other people who had nothing to do with the crime committed.
WARNING: INCOMING RANT
A kid can’t sit still, put him on Ritalin. A kid might feel bad for losing at pee wee sports, give him a trophy for participating. A kid doesn’t get good grades, force the teacher to grade on a curve so he won’t feel bad. Years later this kid is an adult still living with his parents and expecting handouts from the gov’t. He expects a free car, free cell phone, free gas, a free job and free healthcare. Because NOBODY taught this kid growing up that sometimes you have to get off your ass and WORK for the stuff you want. He has NO concept of personal responsibility and expects others to accept blame for the spot he is in in life, and America ENCOURAGES that by constantly finding other people to blame for antisocial and destructive behavior. The above comment from rb325th is a great example. MY property is in MY house, and it is no secret that entering a personal dwelling unauthorized is illegal and a crime and a bad thing to do, etc. And then on top if that, willfully REMOVING property that does not belong to you compounds that crime. And on top of that, USING that stolen property to commit ANOTHER crime again compounds THAT crime. Are you following me???? And after the fact, YOU want to hold the innocent homeowner responsible for the actions of a CRIMINAL??? WTF is wrong with you???
END RANT
All more ways to blame everyone but the criminal that committed the crime. Typical fashion to demonize the person following the law and giving a pass to a criminal because he can’t help himself.
Sure blame the underage kid who left the house party drunk as a skunk and killed the carload of kids with him, but you damn sure can blame the adults who threw the party, supplied the booze, because it was no big deal and they drank at that age so why should their kids…. You go off to work, leave you guns out in the open with a houseful of kids, maybe they aren’t your own, maybe they are. One of them decides they want to be John Wayne and do some quick draw… damn, thought that gun was unloaded. Or the jackass cleaning his unloaded gun and shoots his best friend, girlfriend, kid in the head…. Or God forbid they take it to school to settle that grudge, to even the playing field, or just decide to day is the day they just kill everyone that has ever looked at them wrong. But hey, it isn’t your fault they took your gun and did this… Personal Responsibility does not end when you walk out the door and leave your shit behind for the day does it? You aren’t in your home and you have weapons, lock them the hell up. What is so hard about that? Homes are broken into every day, why would you make it any easier for someone to take your weapons, where you know they are not going to be used for a lawful purpose? Why is it such a big deal to go the extra mile of personal responsibility and lock them up if you aren’t there? it is not infringing on your rights, it is common sense. I don’t care what type of gun anyone owns, or how many they own… just think, do you want to even take the chance you unsecured weapon could get stolen so easily? I’m going to make some dumb punk work his ass off to steal from me, especially something like a gun. No need for it to be out in the open if I am not there… kind of like leaving your weapon unattended when you… Read more »
So if a kid uses bolt cutters or a cutting torch to steal your weapon, is it still your fault? How secure is secure?
I’m on the fence about locking up the guns from your kids. We all know the media likes to only report the stories about how guns are bad but I can think of several stories I’ve randomly come across of how youngsters have defended themselves from intruders:
http://www.koco.com/news/oklahomanews/around-oklahoma/12-year-old-Oklahoma-girl-shoots-intruder/-/12530084/17053634/-/142tpxt/-/index.htmlhttp://www.koco.com/news/oklahomanews/around-oklahoma/12-year-old-Oklahoma-girl-shoots-intruder/-/12530084/17053634/-/142tpxt/-/index.html
or http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/video/son-uses-dads-ar-15-to-defend-home/
If those guns had been locked up and inaccessible, they might not be around to tell their story.
I believe rather than locking all of them up, it’s your duty as a gun owning parent to teach your child the responsibilities of being around a loaded firearm. I currently have my .45 unloaded but stashed next to the magazine in my dresser drawer. My daughter is just now being exposed to firearms, so she doesn’t know it’s location but I’m not naive enough to also know there will come a time she may go snooping when I’m not looking. So I teach her now, it’s not a toy, it’s not something to go out and use on someone else just because you’re angry at them.
Crap, I thought that link looked too long. Sorry about the double copy pasta.
@ #12: Quite simply – it is not my responsibility to protect others from either themselves or from criminals. I have plenty to do taking care of myself, and that would include finding something with which to protect myself for the 30 minutes or more it would take for a cop to get here to pick up the pieces of whatever is left of any criminals who attempt to break in to steal something or harm someone in this household. Please note: the condition the aforementioned criminals when the cops get here is entirely up to the criminals themselves. There would only be the minimal amount of force used which is needed to stop their criminal behavior and detain them for the cops.
And yes, I agree that there is some serious responsibility upon a gun owner to not leave them lying around where those who should not have access to them do not. I had a pistol stolen years ago that was in my car when it was stolen. The pistol was hidden in the car because I was parked in a gubmint parking lot going into a gubmint building which did not really want me to take the pistol in with me. I have often prayed since then that my pistol was not used to kill someone, but I was following some stupid rules which resulted in the potential that my pistol, which would have been much more secure on my person went instead into the hands of a criminal. It was my reasonable expectation that my car was pretty secure so why should I be held responsible legally for the theft?
If you have kids or other idiots in your household, do what you must do. Meanwhile, the argument that my weapons (does that include baseball bats?) should be locked up when I leave the house is absurd. Should knives also be locked up? There is an unsecured set of steak knives sitting on the counter which could do a whole lot of damage. Just how far are we to take this edict?
@1 – yes, having guns in a gun-free zone is breaking the law, but at least here in CO, it is legal for any kids to own guns. They can’t buy them, but they can be given them as gifts. I don’t think that there’s a minimum age either.
It applies to people over 18 but under 21 as well. They can’t purchase handguns or the ammo for them, but they can receive them as gifts. I just did that for my son who turned 20 today.
Which makes the little checkbox on the background check a little weird. You have to say that you’re not buying the gun for someone else, but it’s legal for you to turn around and give it as a gift.
As a 53 yr old LONG time NRA member I can say that we do have a problem. It however is not with guns(any type) or necessarily the access to these weapons. I was around unsecured weapons all my life, and never once did I or they(guns) ever hurt anyone. The main problem we have today is some children and some adults are not taught there are consequences for their actions. Giving kids time out is BS. “Spare the rod(read belt)and spoil the child” is so true. Granted if you have someone in your home who is unstable or has mental or emotional problems I am fully infavor of an extra measure in the securing of weapons. Thats only common sense. But you cannot mandate common sense, or hold someone liable for it’s absence in their decisions or their actions or you would have to hold ALL of Washinton liable, for common sense is totally abscent and pratically outlawed there. Sandy Hooks was a tragedy for sure, and My Prayers go out to those affected everyday, Yet over 40 people(yes, children too)are killed everyday by drunk drivers with a b.a.c. level of .08-.10% yet I hear NO crying for them or for the banning of automobiles or the banning of the ditillation of alcohol. This whole subject is not about Gun Control, it’s about CONTROL period. When we have no guns, THEY have all the control. Liberalism is a disease. They never let facts(REAL FACTS) get in the way of a good story. Find out what shadowy individual owns controlling interests in most papers and news organizations, and is a major contributor to the DNC and Washington through PACS, and I belive owns the company who builds the electronic voting machines. Don’t dismiss this, check it out for yourself, or just keep drinking the koolaid. This once great nation has stooped to desireing FREEstuff more than FREEDOM. Wake up now or you’ll soon get your wish. Once our economy is destroyed, you will have no more freestuff or freedom, then the NWO will step in and the IMF can start… Read more »
Have to agree with “what is secure enough”? Lanza KILLED his mother to get her guns, Holmes in Colorado stole them. How am I responsible for their willingness to commit felonies?
Now when the kids were growing up, I kept the guns unloaded… but the most important thing I did was to teach them how to be safe, what guns could do, and how to shoot. Somehow, amazingly, all survived, none got in trouble over guns (and all can outshoot their husbands.) None were physically locked up… if someone is willing to break into my house, why would locking the guns further do any good? Someone mentioned they don;t want to enable a criminal to become and armed criminal. As soon as walks past those lovely kitchen knives, that point is moot.