BS: Gun control

Subject: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,Bainbo
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:29 PM

Miand now Red Lake, Minnesota

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:42 PM

Google

Red Lake

The story is at the top.

Subject: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,Bainbo
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:45 PM

Houston, Texas (one two-year-old dead); Milwaukee, Wisconsin (seven dead); and now Red Lake, Minnesota (eight dead). For God's sake, America, how bad does it have to get before anybody suggests some degree of gun control?

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:49 PM

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.... (spit)...

Commie...

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:51 PM

I just heard this news on public radio. 8 people dead, including the shooter.
I live about 60 miles from the school. Some articles

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,Bainbo
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:56 PM

But if the people who kill the people can't get hold of the guns... ?

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 09:01 PM

Guns are for pussies

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 09:05 PM

That's right, Clinton... Me and you (spit) could take on a about a dozen of them "pussies" with just our wits and fists... Sho nuff could... (spit)...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 09:40 PM

He apparently killed his grandparents -- his grandfather was an ex-cop -- and used his grandfather's police-issued weapon in the shootings. The school is located on a sovereign Indian reservation. Fifteen wounded, five dead at the school, including the shooter, according to the FBI (who would have jurisdiction, since the incident occured on an Indian reservation).

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,from Minnesota too
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 10:09 PM

I expect this story won't have much in the way of legs. I doubt it will even put the Schiavo story off the top of the page for long, because the people involved are desperately poor people of color, on a remote, impoverished reservation.

They weren't pretty suburban blondes, with well educated parents who look and sound good for the cameras and microphones.

God, I hate these school shootings. When I walk into work in my inner city St. Paul high school tomorrow, it's going to be very crazy because of this. The kids are just freaked out. We have some kids with relatives on Red Lake, who go back and forth between here and the rez, and they will know the families involved.

This just sucks.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 21 Mar 05 - 11:56 PM

I have no desire to 'take anyone on'

If it was my world, only the military and cops would have access to guns...

Be glad it's not....

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 12:19 AM

Well, I was waitin' for a perfect world for years and years. Then I realized it ain't gonna happen. You put guns in ordinary people's hands, that can be dangerous. You put guns only in the hands of cops and soldiers, that can be dangerous too, if the government gets on a certain kind of power trip. Either way. It all depends on about 10,000 different variables which I ain't gonna bore you with by listing them all here.

But I'll speak of a few.

There ain't a lot of murders in Switzerland, but it ain't because of guns or no guns, it's because you got a different society there with a way different social consciousness. There are 10 times as many people in the USA as in Canada, but way more than 10 times as many murders in the USA. Different social consciousness.

No new law or change in the law is going to suddenly make it all go away, folks. There ain't no magic wand out there that a legislator can pull outta his pocket and suddenly make your world safe again.

If there was...they woulda done it by now.

There has always been a lotta gun violence in the USA. It's a tradition, goin' right back to Davy Crockett and Wild Bill Hickock and Baby Face Nelson. That sort of thing tends to repeat itself, specially in the face of factors like grinding urban poverty and suburban alienation.

As for country folks (in more of a wilderness environment), they will always have guns...because in many cases they need them. How are you gonna pass restrictive laws that are flexible enough to take their special circumstances into account?

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 03:07 AM

The idea that guns are not the problem but the solution to every problem is the most dangerous concept.

A concept still being being promoted by just about every movie. And when movie stars like Ronnie and Arnie are elected into power - this simplistic and fictional approach is one that many voters appear to be voting for.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 03:16 AM

more carelessness?

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 04:16 AM

It seems odd that the Grandfather as an EX cop, still had his police issue gun, did he still wear his uniform too? I mean when you retire you give the tools of the trade back don't you?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 04:33 AM

In the bbc report linked to, a local fire chief reports seeing the boy coming into the school with a number of weapons?

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 05:34 AM

You need to carry a gun to defend yourself against nutters like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: RangerSteve
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 06:26 AM

Giok, in my department, we have the option of purchasing our guns when we retire. I imagine it's the same in other departments.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: John O'L
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 07:04 AM

"God, I hate these school shootings." - Guest from Minnesota too

Is that what it's come to then?
God I hate these rainy days, these parking cops, these warms beers, these cold hot dogs, these school shootings.
How many more will there be before it doesn't even rate a mention?

It's pretty plain to see that loaded guns are just too easy to get. It might be people who do the killing but access to a loaded gun makes it a first option rather than a later one, or perhaps even one that might be out of the question.

NB: I'm not just talking about the USA here, I don't know wnat per capita rates are for any countries, but I see it in the news enough to tell me that the rates are too high everywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: kendall
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 07:53 AM

Chongo, right on. To blame guns for the actions of a few nuts is like blaming cars for killing or maiming 50,000 Americans a year.
What we need is a change of attitude. A killing doesn't start with the availability of a gun, it starts with the desire to harm someone, and a baseball bat, knife or poison will do the job too. I dare say most of us would like to harm someone, but we are able to control the desire and weigh the consequences. Those nut cases lack the impulse control that most of us have.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:07 AM

Like I said above, the victims weren't pretty suburban blondes. This story will disappear in no time because the shooter and victims are poor people of color living on a remote reservation.

The kid's mother is in a nursing home (car accident)and his father committed suicide last year. He was being raised by the grandparents. With an ex-BIA cop as the new authority in his life who was apparently a real jerk (according to a friend of mine from Red Lake who is a former district attorney in the area who had a couple of cases dealing with guy), on top of being mercilessly bullied at school, this kid never stood much of a chance either. So he took out his pain and rage at the world with grandpa's guns.

Of course, the right wing press is painting him as a "goth" teen and neo-nazi.

It's going to be a long week for those of us who work in Minnesota high schools. I hate being this cynical, but I have to say--what do people expect when we treat kids like this shooter like human garbage, and put him in a house full of guns in our society?

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:44 AM

Jeff Weise's opinions posted in a Nationalist Forum (link goes to cache)

"Todesengel" = "death angel"

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: gnu
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:49 AM

GUEST said : "...being mercilessly bullied at school, ..." We have a large campaign underway in Canada to stop this type of abuse. Ads and programs on TV, radio, internet, and telephone help lines, school initiatives, and so on. One of the most positive things to come along in years.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:57 AM

We have one of those programs going on at my high school too. The kids ignore it, and the staff agrees it isn't making a dent, because the culture of public education institutions can't deal with the sort of systemic change in it's authoritarian behavior to make it effective, especially when no change is being initiated in the communities the kids live in.

So thanks for those links Wolfgang, proving how quickly we can reduce the shooter to cartoon goth nazi caricature. As if that explains a fucking thing as to why he did this.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:02 AM

Dear God, Wolfgang.

1. Many jurisdictions present the sidearm(s) they carried to cops when they retire. The State of Idaho recently voted to do the same for Conservation Officers (game wardens), as they too are sworn and trained police officers.

2. I don't have enough data on this to determine carelessness -- but to take two handguns and a shotgun to a school with the intent of doing harm is neither careless nor accidental. It's the action of someone who is mentally ill -- and why wasn't this discovered and treated?

3. Because, in answer to #2, the people involved are dirt poor, rural, and non-white. And many are without hope. Visit any Indian reservation; visit the Inuit and the Yupiq. Study the incidence of crime and drug use, and then tell me how well we treat a culture with 40% unemployment (as the Shoshone-Bannocks have here).

4. I just wonder how long before the poor in the United States will continue before they see the pie in the sky they are fed for what it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:07 AM

At Columbine, the perps also made a number of bombs and grenades out of some fairly ordinary product, as I recall. Perhaps we should get rid of these, as well. And those friggin' airplanes that they flew into those buildings, they need to go. McVeigh used fertilizer and I believe that makes a helluva case for getting rid of this very dangerous substance. Andrea, the Texas Mom, drowned her babies in a bathtub, time for those to go while we are on the kick.

I have no yank with countries for whom weapons are not a part of their culture. I have no issue with those who choose not to have them in their homes. But they have been a part of this country's culture since its inception. They are not going anywhere, despite the persistent attacks. Money and time would be much better spent trying to find out what would drive a young man to kill his grandparents and classmates and then attacking the problem. Solve the issue of hopelessness and helplessness, and you go a long way to ending this stuff. Make serious attacks on the issues of the widening gap between the richest and poorest instead of providing tax breaks for multinational corporations, and you provide real economic stimulus. Stop bullying in our schools, and take real steps to nurture the least among us, and you won't see much of this shit.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:11 AM

Rapaire, from what Guest a few posts above said he was not mentally ill. Just angry and hurt. If he was bullied, he may have been bullied once to often and most of us have breaking points. I don't think any mental health treatment will stop a person feeling they have been pushed that one step too far and feel that quite reasonably. I think it's more a case that loaded guns are a dangerous thing to have around in that situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,Bainbo
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:12 AM

The difference with aeroplanes, fertilizer and bathtubs is that they aren't made, sold, or bought with the intention of killing or injuring. Guns only have one purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:13 AM

Menatl illness is often undetected until the person makes a plea for help. Until then it can be passed off as teenage angst. This was his plea for help. If he didnt have access to guns nine people may be alive today. Had he gone in armed with a baseball bat he would have been overpowered sooner rather than later.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:19 AM

Really, Bainbo? How is it that of all the folks I know who own guns, none (outside of a wartime environment) have killed another human being? Thought ever occur to you that we own them for hunting, shooting sports, etc? This country has had an armed citizenry from its inception. The people that commit these crimes don't do it because guns are available, they do it because they are sick. I don't have a source, but I am willing to bet you that in excess of 90% of those who own weapons have never committed a crime with them, nor will they.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:23 AM

And by the way, Bainbo, your argument actually supports mine. The largest mass murders have occurred with things that had nothing to do with guns. People kill, they will find the means. If this sick kid in Minnesota had walked in with a knife and stabbed 10 folks, would that be different? If he had taken some fertilizer and kerosene and blown the school up, would the argument be the same? Or would you be angry that our society has failed these young folks to the point that they murder others?

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:27 AM

Big Mick I am sure you are right with the figures. But if my kids were among the dead, those figures would offer no comfort to me. I read Bainbo's post that the only purpose guns had was to be shot. That IS their only purpose and once they are available we are humanly unable to police who shoots what.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:32 AM

If he had a knife the chances are he would have also been overpowered. He would have had to be in very close proximity to his victims and at risk himself of being taken out with a chair.

He would probably have been spotted lugging in enough kerosene and fertilizer to blow up the school.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:32 AM

As I said earlier, I have too little data upon which to base an opinion. My thought is that he was mentally ill (read the posts that Wolfgang has linked to), and I more than suspect he was definitely at the end of hope.

Jon, in the posts he states that he had been in some fights at school but there is no indication that he was bullied, at least that I could find. He makes reference to his "size" preventing others from picking on him.

A gun points and fires in only one direction at a time. Like a ball bat wielder, why didn't someone or a group tackle the shooter? It's been done before.

But I don't have enough data -- and I don't think I'll get it from the news feeds.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:36 AM

why didn't someone or a group tackle the shooter?

For the same reason thousands don't every year? They were scared? That isn't a crime.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:40 AM

Rapaire, I was reading Guest: 22 Mar 8:07AM (a name would help...)

He said:
The kid's mother is in a nursing home (car accident)and his father committed suicide last year. He was being raised by the grandparents. With an ex-BIA cop as the new authority in his life who was apparently a real jerk (according to a friend of mine from Red Lake who is a former district attorney in the area who had a couple of cases dealing with guy), on top of being mercilessly bullied at school, this kid never stood much of a chance either. So he took out his pain and rage at the world with grandpa's guns.

I wouldn't know about tackling someone with a gun. I'd have thought many people would be too scared and it would need someone with experience. But I don't live in a country where guns are common.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:41 AM

Right, Rapaire, as usual you examine things in a more logical way. The point isn't what would have happened if he had a knife. The proper question is, if he HAD done it with a knife, bat, whatever, would your response be the same. In typical liberal logic, we treat the symptom instead of the disease. The point isn't that a gun was used to kill these unfortunates. It is that they were killed. That is why the McVeigh analogy, the Andrea analogy, and the 911 analogy are relevant. Guns in the US aren't going away. After all these years of trying by the anti gun lobby, there are more States with "shall issue" Concealed Carry Weapons Permits than ever. Deal with what caused the kid to kill, rather than what he used to kill. Then you make real progress, save lives, instead of just making yourself feel better over a simplistic band aid fix.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Midchuck
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:42 AM

The difference with aeroplanes, fertilizer and bathtubs is that they aren't made, sold, or bought with the intention of killing or injuring. Guns only have one purpose.

If that's true, how could I have fired off hundreds and hundreds of rounds, mostly from handguns, and never once killed or injured anyone or anything, except whatever bugs or worms were living in the side hill I used as a backstop...as is in fact the case?

(And those damn tin cans, of course...they're taking over. Gotta wipe 'em out!)

Peer.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 09:47 AM

In typical liberal logic, we treat the symptom instead of the disease

And that is where the difference in our opinion lies. I see the availability of guns as the disease. They are far easier to spot than mental illness in teenagers.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:22 AM

Guns is good says us Americans. That's how the west was won.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:29 AM

Actually the difference is something quite different. I think we agree on the horrific nature of these crimes. And if I thought for one minute that you could limit the availability of guns, including my own, and stop gun violence, I would get behind it foursquare. It's my opinion that your logic is flawed in that you believe that you can get rid of guns. It ignores the fact that far in excess of 90% of legally owned weapons are never used for anything other than legitimate purposes. It also ignores the fact that most guns used in violent crime are illegally obtained. Each time a State tries to prohibit ordinary folks from owning guns, the criminals go to another State. When the Brady stuff came in, the criminals went to other countries. Violence by those that would do violence, never ends. All one does when they limit guns is take them away from ordinary, law abiding citizens. And finally, your logic fails because it is always based on these high profile cases. You try to use a disturbed teenager in Minnesota to make a case that every sportsman/woman knows isn't true. This is why the issue has never been won at the ballot box. And all the while you split the vote with folks that otherwise would agree with us on economic, working family issues. You send these folks over to vote for a war monger, and for what? So you can take away legitimately owned weapons from folks who have never committed a crime, and for the most part never will.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Kim C
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:33 AM

Umm, don't they have guns in other countries too? Even in countries where it's supposedly "illegal" for private citizens to own guns?

There's been a loaded pistol in my house for 15 years. It's never even been fired.

You can pass all the gun control laws you want - but criminals, by definition, don't obey laws.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:38 AM

To suggest a hypothetical "but what if he had made a fertilizer bomb or a knife" is ridiculous.

The hypothetical questions should be "what would this kid have done if he hadn't had access to his grandfather's guns and police car"?

Yes, he used his grandfather's cruiser to drive to the school. When I say he was ex-BIA, I didn't mean he was retired. The grandfather was employed as a Red Lake tribal cop. They don't have near the power that the BIA cops.

I am not excusing what this kid did by a long shot. A lot of American Indian kids grow up in very similar circumstances on the rez (ie the issues related to poverty, poor parenting, losing parents,etc), but don't usually take out their rage and pain on others. It is more likely to be directed inward. The difference in this case seems to be access to the weapons and the bullying.

All the local Minnesota news accounts are describing him as a loner who was bullied for his "odd looks". He was extremely tall apparently, and dressed in punk style, which would make him stand out on the rez in a way that he wouldn't in my inner city high school, where we have tons of kids dressing in punk fashions--they are very popular right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:44 AM

Ahhh, I wondered when the voice of the great North would chime in. And with her/his own superior brand of logic too.

Read this for comprehension, OK? Your beginning statement above To suggest a hypothetical "but what if he had made a fertilizer bomb or a knife" is ridiculous. is a gratuitous assertion. It can be just as gratuitously denied. Hence, you are full of shit.

One more thing, you are attempting to move the discussion away from the point made. We call that "shifting the premise" in the big leagues. It angered you, IMO, that I pointed out the larger issue of splitting what otherwise would be a decent voting block over these tragic incidents.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:45 AM

I have always felt that all guns ought to be banned, they are an a menace, they serve no useful purpose and they do not need to exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:47 AM

Now that was a well stated and succinct response. I understand, and respectfully disagree.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:58 AM

I discussed the Red Lake tragedy with my students this morning. I then asked the students in the Grade 8 class how many owned guns. The answer was 63%. The total number of guns is more than the total number of students in the class. I also asked what the guns were for. The reply? Hunting and target shooting. One student is learning to restore guns--he and his dad are working on an older .22 rifle. Virtually 100% of the kids keep the ammunition in locked cabinets in different rooms from the rifles.

I have no idea how many guns there are in Canada. I would guess a figure over 20,000,000.

Last, when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: kendall
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:00 AM

If I could wave a magic wand and eliminate all guns, I would do it in a heart beat. I can't, no one can. We must deal with things as they are, not as we wish they were.
Kids need education; so do the teachers. Stop the bullies. If you see child abuse, call a cop, get involved or pay the cost of standing back doing nothing.
A gun is like any other tool, it will harm no one until some nut case decides to "get even".
Children getting a hold of unsecured guns is another story with another solution.

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:06 AM

Most justifications for censorship measures for pornography etc - use the fear of pornography falling into the hands of children.

Is it not the same with guns?

Subject: RE: BS: Gun control
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:19 AM

A naked person means little (in a sexual sense) to a child. So what then changes a naked person into pornography? Maybe the same thing that turns a rifle into a weapon.