Has it been shown that the kid had the gun in his backpack, rather than on his body, under clothes?
Please show us where any poster here said a child should be allowed to have a handgun.
To play devil’s advocate, I don’t think this analogy holds up. The a priori hypothesis that something portrayed in a video game leads to something happening in real life is only reasonable after both things are observed. Many video games have people shooting each other, and people do shoot each other in real life. Proposing the possibility of a causal connection is not unreasonable.
If you did invade Saipan in real life, after the fact I might indeed quite reasonably be suspicious that there’s some connection to your video game activities.
Since the DA’s comment was based upon established common law, it was that way before he made the comment, they didn’t ask him for a legal opinion of “is it legal to search this kids pack?”
We have shown all the court cases etc that make it established common and case law. The school had the authority before the DA made his comment.
Yes, they don’t work. The states with the most strict gun control laws have violent crime rates about the same as those with the most loose.
What is the definition of insanity?
“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results .
Gun control laws have not worked in America… so let’s pass more!
However, again we are getting away from the OP and into yet another general pointless gun control debate.
Sociologists and criminologists have done studies - video games and violent TV do not seem to be the cause.
However Media coverage of the shootings IS a cause. Canada, for example, does not allow the names of the shooters to be broadcast. The media has shown these troubled kids this is a way to get that attention they so desperately crave. I have cited peer reviewed studies that back this up.
All we have to do is not name the shooter. We already do that for rape victims.
Nice sarcastic aphorism, except - as has been laid out in some detail above - it does not correspond to the facts. The correct sarcastic aphorism is -
Gun control laws, where they exist, have never been adequately enforced… so let’s assume they cannot work!
In some states, plenty of gin control- which does nothing to lower the violent crime rate.
And sure,you can’t have "gun violence’ without guns. You can still have plenty of other violence however.
Cite? I mean, yes, many laws are not adequately enforced.
However, rather that suggest enforcement of the laws we do have , what is being suggested here is pass more laws… which won’t or can’t be enforced.
I can assure you that the gun control laws in CA are enforced.
I’m not going to read the thread for you. There’s a discussion upthread.
But no cites.
First hand evidence from @pkbites, who works in law enforcement.
What are your cites? You haven’t even presented an alternative hypothesis for why existing gun control laws are ineffective. Your approach is pretty much analogous to saying that since what the world has done so far to try to ameliorate climate change isn’t working, we might as well stop trying.
Except that they do have an effect overall. There are some instances where they have failed and boy do pro-gun types love to cherry-pick those (cough Kleck cough). And in some of the cases, it is because the efforts have not been particularly comprehensive. There’s little point in having gun control in a city when you can buy a gun 3 inches outside the city.
Siegel, M., Pahn, M., Xuan, Z., Fleegler, E., & Hemenway, D. (2019). The impact of state firearm laws on homicide and suicide deaths in the USA, 1991–2016: a panel study. Journal of general internal medicine , 34 (10), 2021-2028.
Zeoli, A. M., McCourt, A., Buggs, S., Frattaroli, S., Lilley, D., & Webster, D. W. (2018). Retracted: Analysis of the Strength of Legal Firearms Restrictions for Perpetrators of Domestic Violence and Their Associations With Intimate Partner Homicide. American journal of epidemiology , 187 (7), 1449-1455.
Ghiani, M., Hawkins, S. S., & Baum, C. F. (2019). Associations between gun Laws and Suicides. American journal of epidemiology , 188 (7), 1254-1261.
And I showed the Supreme Court case that casts that into doubt. Kids in school still have some 4th amendment protection. Did the school have enough reason to search in this case? DA says yes, after the fact. Did the school counselor get a legal opinion on this at the time? No. Did the school think this case had enough reason to search the backpack? Clearly they did not.
Yeah, he was trying to explain why he made those drawings so he could get out of trouble that day, not actually expressing a real desire to become a video game programmer. He then went on to murder 4 fellow students later the same day. Something tells me an obsession with a career making video games wasn’t top of his mind that day.
Did the school even want to search the backpack, did it even consider it, and for the third tine, is there any evidence the gun was in his backpack?
Obviously there’s strong circumstantial evidence it was in there. Where else are you suggesting it might have been?
It was a a handgun. You can easily conceal a handgun under your clothes, people do it all the time, sometimes even a pocket can be large enough. In fact, in general, concealed weapons are not carried in backpacks.
Everyone is making the assumption that the gun was in the pack, but there is no reason to make that assumption. Others are making the assumption that the School seriously considered searching the pack, but didn’t due to possible 4th Ad considerations.
If you eat cereal, and then rape someone, is the cereal part of the cause?
It’s possible. But the obvious better place to conceal it would be to put it your backpack. Would anyone have the expectation that if the school were to decide they had reasonable cause to search their backpack for a gun, they would not also ask them to open/lift a coat or baggy clothing to make sure a gun was concealed on their person?
In any event… why does this matter?