(actually, sorry, deleted because it’s too off topic)
My sympathy for the parents of the shooter is tempered by the fact that his mother bought the gun for him!
Off topic Gun issues
“John used a Maverick 88 pump-action 12-gauge shotgun in the attack, Krantz said. The gun had been purchased by his mother, a senior law enforcement official briefed on the investigation told CNN earlier Friday.”
I’m trying not to skate too close to the mod instruction, but for crying out loud, what kind of parent, who is in law enforcement buys their kid a 12-gauge shotgun? What was he supposed to do with it?
Response to off topic gun issue
It’s not clear whether she bought it for him or if he simply took her (presumably improperly secured) shotgun.
From that same article:
The shooter’s mother spoke to CNN off camera from her balcony but would not comment on how her son got access to the weapon. Authorities say that is still under investigation.
I also don’t think the mother was in law enforcement, just interviewed by someone who was? Unless I missed something?
off topic gun issue continues
Ah, thanks – ISTM the implication was that she gave it to him. I’m still wondering what someone is supposed to do with a 12 gauge. You don’t hunt with it, do you? [Sorry if this is off topic]
off topic gun issue continues
On this particular mother, I don’t know and don’t want to speculate… that’s up to the investigators to find out.
But don’t most school shooters use their parents’ weapons?
I think Oregon has (or was about to enact) a secure storage requirement in our gun laws, but I’m not sure. The implication is that the weapons are usually taken without the parents’ knowledge.
How much of that is reality and how much of that is 2A propaganda (e.g. that having guns and kids at home is fine as long as they’re secured), I don’t know.
As for shotguns, I think people do buy them for hunting and home defense, and also sometimes just because they like shotguns. That’s probably a whole other debate though.
off topic gun issue continues
Are you speaking as someone with knowledge of the laws of that particular state? Because that’s not the law everywhere. In my state a CCW permit does not give you the right to bring a gun into prohibited areas. In my state as a police officer it was not legal for me to carry my gun into my kids schools. I could only enter schools in my jurisdiction while I was on official business.
In this particular circumstance I don’t believe there would be an issue.
You can “what if” things to death. He chose a course of action and it worked. Any other course of action had the possibility of failing and causing more casualties.
The problem with declaring that because something was the least bad thing in the situation makes it a good thing is that it makes it a little easier to do that bad thing another time; including by other people. Calling it a good thing makes it more likely that it’ll be done when it’s not necessary.
This.
And this.
There’s significant distance between ‘thank you very much for doing that difficult thing which almost certainly saved many lives. We’re extremely grateful. You deserve to be rewarded. If you need treatment to deal with what you’re probably going through after having had to kill someone, we’re happy to pay for that, and/or for whatever else you and your family might need’ and ‘yay! whoop de do! Let’s throw a celebration because you killed somebody!’
And which of those reactions do you think is more likely to lead to someone else shooting the wrong person in some situation that they imagine is similar? Or even to someone creating such a situation, because what went into the back of their head was ‘killing somebody gets you glory’?
Moderating:
Thread temporarily locked for moderation, will reopen shortly.
I have hidden a series of posts that were discussing acquisition, access, and use of the guns in question. The OP very clearly stated that is NOT what the thread is about. @What_Exit made sure that such were forbidden by amending the title, and adding a very clear Official Notice of no tolerance to the OP as well.
We have since had multiple off-topic postings - many of which have included the language “This might be off topic.” Three posters were generously given notes despite the clear language of the earlier moderation, in part because they were more hypothetical off-topic discussions, but not about guns.
This morning, starting with @bobsmom101’s post, we went into Gun topics, specifically about purchases by parents that their minor children use. In part (the part I didn’t hide) it was to address a comment upthread about “empathy” for the parents, but then went directly into a gun discussion. Several other posters replied, all of which were off topic.
As such, @bobsmom101, this is an Official Warning for Disregarding Moderator instructions.
I’m extending a bit of consideration and not issuing warnings to those who extended the discussion, namely @Reply and @Loach, but next time please remember, replying to a hijack is a mitigating circumstance, not an excuse.
Otherwise, I am reminding all that the OP’s request and prior moderation instructions stand - if you cannot help posting on the subject of gun debate issues in this thread, spin off another Gun Debate (if you must), or re-open one of the many existing ones.
How to Reply as a linked Topic
Click Reply, in the upper left corner of the reply window is the reply type button, looks like a curving arrow point to the right.
Choose Reply as linked topic and it starts a new thread. As an example, you can choose GD, IMHO or The Pit for it.
That is actually the best method.
The thread will reopen in 10 minutes.
This topic was automatically opened after 10 minutes.
I am not all convinced this is true.
Has there been any “Yay! You killed someone!”
All I’ve read is “Yay! You saved lives!”
I am sad that a disturbed minor chose to do this. I wish our society did not result in this happening ever and discussion of how to reduce it is not this thread.
Ideally the shooter would have not had a life that led to this point. They can never get better now and that is of course its own tragedy. My sincere condolences to those who loved that person.
And I 100% endorse that the saving of multiple other lives is to be celebrated.
I imagine neither will impact the choice that day. I don’t imagine those choices are made with those considerations in mind.
And to the limited extent that it is true, calling it a “necessary evil” or finding ways to cast blame on the dad makes it more likely that it will NOT be done when it IS necessary.
I don’t think she’s gotten nearly enough credit. She probably did more to stop the murders than the shooter did.
That had already been done, as was previously noted in the thread. And it worked.
I think the actions of the dad with a gun were reasonable. Stopping a crime is not vigilante justice, and stopping murder with deadly force is not generally excessive. But I’m troubled by how this is framed, about a heroic killer, with little coverage of the heroic non-deadly force applied by a teacher.
In talking with law enforcement officers who have been in the situation of having to instantly decide whether to use lethal force and kill someone, I don’t think a lot of thought goes into it in the moment.
A person is faced with an immediate situation and they react on prior training and instinct. It’s a very individual thing. Most of the private grief and “should I have”'s don’t come into it until much later, when there is ample time to reflect.
I am very sure this is the case with this father. He will never not live with this now. It has become a defining part of who he is. I hope he can make his peace with it. Some never do.
Noted, and sorry. I had just woken up and forgot the OP’s request. No more gun talk.
Right? Part of it, I think / hope, is how much uncertainty there still is around the whole thing pending the investigation.
Hopefully we’ll learn more of her as the investigation progresses.
It’s one thing to follow a mass shooter into a school while you’re armed and stalking them – which, to be clear, is itself a heroic act.
But it’s another level of bravery to be caught completely by surprise by one while you’re teaching class, and then to have the presence of mind to then suddenly charge and wrestle him, unarmed but for a phone.
The particular details of those couple of fateful minutes have not been super clear so far. I suspect we’ll get more details later. Probably a movie too…
Also, I wonder if this teacher might’ve known the shooter…? Was she his former teacher…?
My 2-¢:
First, referring to a male old enough to commit rape as a “child” is disingenuous. This wasn’t some confused mis-brought up prepubescent fifth grader. This was a youth old enough to commit heinous acts and presumed to ought to know better. That is why there is such a thing as being tried as an adult. Technically, there’s no such thing as being “tried as a child”: children are remanded to remedial discipline up to and including juvenile detention until they’re an adult. If their actions are deemed beyond correcting by mere supervision, it becomes a criminal case.
Second, killing ≠ murder. Sometimes, on mercifully rare occasions, shooting someone dead is the right thing to do. Especially, when it’s a murderer’s life vs. an innocent victim’s life. One can consider it tragic that it came to that, but that does not mean it wasn’t the least horrible course of action.
I agree. That teacher hasn’t gotten enough credit.
At the very least she delayed the gunman but did she stop him?
I have done no such thing.
CNN had an interview today with a nine-year-old fourth grade student at the school. I have no idea whether it’s helpful for her to appear on television after a trauma like that.
I didn’t say that you did.
We’ll never know, because he was killed. It’s unclear to me exactly what happened, but from the reporting, it sounds like she was holding him firmly enough that the dad was able to “aim carefully” to kill the murderer, and not her.
A couple more adults jumping in to help restrain him probably would have been enough to hold him until police officers could have arrested him. But we’ll never know.