What will it take to end these senseless school shootings?

[bcla]

And at least some states in the US with tighter restrictions have higher numbers of gun violence. You guys keep trying to say "we have these rules, that's why we don't have that problem", but you have no proof. Assume it all you want, but you know what that does.

Across national borders is a little bit different than across state borders. Just sayin'.

I remember when New York City ran a little sting of pretending to make a straw purchase of a firearm outside of the state, and some of the states threatened to sue.

https://gothamist.com/news/nyc-stings-out-of-state-gun-dealers​

Over the past six weeks, investigators from the James Mintz Group, a private investigative firm employed by the City, traveled to five states to confirm what gun trace data had already shown probable – that these gun dealers were violating federal laws governing firearms sales. The investigators, in teams of two, entered gun stores and followed a scenario commonly known as “straw purchasing” – where one individual makes all of the inquiries into purchasing the gun, and then the other individual, completely uninvolved in the sale process, fills out the required federal forms to pass the background check. Federal law prohibits licensed dealers from selling firearms to individuals when they have a reasonable belief that the firearm being sold is not for the person who purports to be the purchaser.​

This is a pretty common way.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html​

In fact, there are a number of sources that allow guns to fall into the wrong hands, with gun thefts at the bottom of the list. Wachtel says one of the most common ways criminals get guns is through straw purchase sales. A straw purchase occurs when someone who may not legally acquire a firearm, or who wants to do so anonymously, has a companion buy it on their behalf. According to a 1994 ATF study on "Sources of Crime Guns in Southern California," many straw purchases are conducted in an openly "suggestive" manner where two people walk into a gun store, one selects a firearm, and then the other uses identification for the purchase and pays for the gun. Or, several underage people walk into a store and an adult with them makes the purchases. Both of these are illegal activities.​

​

The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. Several recent reports back up Wachtel's own studies about this, and make the case that illegal activity by those licensed to sell guns, known as Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), is a huge source of crime guns and greatly surpasses the sale of guns stolen from John Q. Citizen. Like bank robbers, who are interested in banks, gun traffickers are interested in FFLs because that's where the guns are. This is why FFLs are a large source of illegal guns for traffickers, who ultimately wind up selling the guns on the street.​

Now there have been some cases where certain gun shops seem to be the source of an inordinate amount of guns used in crimes. There was one shop in my area that used to run a lot of ads in the local newspapers. I think what finally got their federal firearms license pulled was that they couldn't account for the whereabouts of hundreds of guns. And some of the stuff people talked about was shocking, like when the Alameda County Sheriff was there shopping for a personal firearm.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/menace.html​

While federal officials try to respond to the public's growing support of gun control without alienating gun advocates, Traders continues to sell guns. One day when Alameda County Sheriff Charles Plummer -- who has purchased weapons at Traders -- was in the gun store, he struck up a conversation with a young man standing next to him. As Plummer recounted the story during a public hearing, he pointed to the Chinese assault weapon the young man was examining and said, "Gee, that's a lousy looking weapon. How come you're buying that piece of junk?"​

​

"Oh, this is a fine weapon," the young man said. "It doesn't look good, but it really shoots."​

​

"What kind of game do you shoot with this thing? I mean, I'm an old deer hunter. I used to go deer hunting when I was a kid," Plummer said. "Is this for elk or moose?"​

​

"No," the young man replied, "this is for killing people."​

 

[prairie_girl]

And at least some states in the US with tighter restrictions have higher numbers of gun violence. You guys keep trying to say "we have these rules, that's why we don't have that problem", but you have no proof. Assume it all you want, but you know what that does.

No proof? I think the fact that the US has had 43 school shootings this year and Canada hasn’t might just be some proof.

I really don’t want to argue with you, or anyone, about yet another senseless tragedy. It’s horrible no matter the country or the circumstances and I hope one day it will be a thing of the past.

 

[prairie_girl]

I have spent time in Canada and would never consider that Canadian culture is identical to US culture or that Canada is essentially the same as the US except for firearms regulations. This lone difference must then be the reason for difference in violence as I understand your argument. I hugely prefer US culture, problems and all, to Canadian culture although Western Canada is very beautiful.

I definitely was not saying that we are like the US in culture or that we are the same except for guns. I was merely saying that the answer isn’t video games or movies, because we have the same access to them that you do.

I feel like this is getting detailed a bit so I’ll just be an observer now. So, if you reply, I’m not ignoring you, I’m just self editing.

 

[penn19]

So, according to what the mom posted online (insta, I think), they bought the gun FOR the shooter as an early Christmas present. They need to be charged as well.

Also, without meaning to, I saw the mug shot. He’s only 15 or 16 but he has dead eyes. It was really jarring to see.

That’s what I thought when I saw the mugshot. Not a lot going on in his soul.

 

[lisaviolet]

I don't know how you cannot conclude that there is some other important difference between Canada and California that contributes to gun violence other than availability of firearms.

In general terms, not this one school shooting -

I concluded that some of our children would use a gun against their classmates if they had easier access. And I stand by that. Having guns in the hands of Canadians does not mean that our children have easy access to them. So maybe there is a start right there, no clue though. Thinking out loud.
I do have a niece and nephew born and raised in the state mentioned and up here regularly as well, so maybe I should ask their thoughts. At a loss.

I do know that our police work very hard on keeping illegal/unregistered guns off the streets in my city, which is at least comparable in population to many of your cities. But this shooter used his father's. so no gun law would have changed that.


But once again yes I believe some of our children would do the same as yours.

And I do not believe most of these children think beyond the moment of their actions or plans. Other than that, have at it pahoben. I have no clue.

What do you think is different in our children/culture? Curious.

 

[PixieT78]

And at least some states in the US with tighter restrictions have higher numbers of gun violence. You guys keep trying to say "we have these rules, that's why we don't have that problem", but you have no proof. Assume it all you want, but you know what that does.

I think a difference in Canada is that our country wasn't built with gun ownership as one of the major items in our constitution/Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 300+ years of having the right to bear arms ingrained in a society seems like it could mean certain aspects of violence through movies/video games/social media hit in a different way than those who didn't have that same kind of generational thought. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about where we don't yet know about the impact of this stuff on mental health down to the little detail. And until countries/insurance companies decide that prevention in the first place is better than paying for the fix, the research won't be done. Get into the lobbying etc that is around, and that's another reason why this kind of research would never be paid for.

So no, I don't think it is entirely about tighter restrictions but more of a gun attitude in Canada that is different. The tighter restrictions around ownership to me, however, do seem like ONE of the ways this violence could stop. But in this case, assuming the reports of the father buying it for the son are true, tighter restrictions wouldn't have helped anything. for this one, we need to look at the parents. How the hell could they allow their school-aged son to have access to the gun without them around? Giving your underage son a gun to use with the parent at a shooting range or whatever and then locking it up is one thing. Somehow allowing free access is something totally different.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Remember when we had neighborhood schools?

We still do. Neighborhood schools are the norm here. I don't think it was that common though to have a lot of high schools but elementary schools? yes and then middle/junior high. Each of the big 3 districts has 5 high schools, the district I live in added their 5th very high tech school a few years back (reflective on my property tax bill of course for the bond lol)

Yes consolidation has happened in my area, my elementary school and middle school no longer exist due to this, but generally that has followed population differences. In my area people have moved out more west and more south where expansion is still able to occur. This pushes just where the students are located at.

My neighborhood I grew up in at my mom's house people stayed and stayed and stayed. There's really not many kids left in that immediate area so an elementary school within a 10min walk from my house no longer was as needed.

Not all consolidation ends up being favorable but at least in my area it's not just simply to lump everyone together but rather readjust where the students are. And they also build new schools, again where population has shown is needed.

Do you think that smaller schools is even possible?

Smaller schools aren't always better though. I look at some of the technology and resources and learning opportunities that can be had at some of the schools in my area and I wonder if we had too many micro schools (especially at the high school level, more of what I'm talking about) resources would end up being spread too thin. Buildings are expensive along with utilities, equipment is expensive, staff is expensive, school busing contracts is expensive, etc. So I agree pushing into having too large can be an issue but I'm not sure small would necessarily work for all. FWIW my old high school had about 2,000 students 9-12 when I was there. I don't believe that students received an inferior education because of that or that it led to kid problems. But the era I lived in was not necessarily the same it is now. Still though I would agree there can be a fine line between overcrowded class rooms and balancing that out with the realistic aspect of a school district's capabilities for many schools.

 

[MrsPete]

There have been 48 shootings in K-12 schools this calendar year, 32 of them since August 1st, the start of current school year. For what? Why?

We teachers have "Active Shooter Training" every year too. They're informative. Every one of us teachers has a plan based upon the location of our classroom and other individual factors.

One thing that makes it possible for me to keep coming into school every day: The VAST MAJORITY of these school shootings aren't the random kid brandishing a weapon against anyone in the way. The majority of school shootings take place in the student parking lot after school between small groups of people who know and hate one another.

Of course this doesn't make it acceptable; even one school shooting is too many -- and an innocent bystander could still be caught in the wrong place at the wrong time -- but most of these school shootings are more like bad kids taking personal fights to a really awful level.

 

[lisaviolet]

However, that solution needs to reasonable and realistic. Saying "ban all guns", IMO is neither reasonable nor realistic.

Who is saying this Sam? Certainly no one here that I have seen. Do you mean that suggestion is rampant at home?

 

[sam_gordon]

Who is saying this Sam? Certainly no one here that I have seen. Do you mean that suggestion is rampant at home?

It comes up all the time after these events. I mention it as an example.

What do you think is different in our children/culture? Curious.

I don't know enough about your culture to say. Do you know enough about ours to say there is no difference OTHER than access to guns?

 

[BayouQueen]

I'd like to see better health care -- the ability to institutionalize people who are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others. And less violence in the media -- movies, games, etc. It gins up unstable people. But I don't think either of these things will happen.

 

[lisaviolet]

The tighter restrictions around ownership to me, however, do seem like ONE of the ways this violence could stop. But in this case, assuming the reports of the father buying it for the son are true, tighter restrictions wouldn't have helped anything. for this one, we need to look at the parents.

This is exactly how I think. It is one of the issues at hand.

And like prairie girl I will now try to exit stage left and just read, as there is not much else to add at this point, besides sadness and frustration.

It comes up all the time after these events. I mention it as an example.

I don't know enough about your culture to say. Do you know enough about ours to say there is no difference OTHER than access to guns?

Once again I never said that was the only issue at hand. But an issue nonetheless.

Answer to your question -

Certainly not as much as living there obviously, but a lot. I am physically there a lot.

Have a multitude of intimate relationships with Americans that are over many decades. Lived with two in university.

My brother lived there for almost thirty years. And that means I have an American niece and nephew.

But you didn't really want to know all that, right?

 

[JimMIA]

Ok...so how crazy is this?

A 13 year-old boy shot his 14 year old sister and killed her. He wasn't mad at his sister, he was shooting at robbers.

It seems that the 13 year-old boy is an entrepreneur -- he makes and sells "ghost guns," which are real, but homemade guns without serial numbers and which are therefore untraceable. Some folks showed up posing as customers wanting to buy untraceable guns (probably NOT for target practice), but were stealing the guns instead.

From the article: "The 13-year-old boy and 19-year-old Yusef Jabryil McArthur El, one of the people who made off with the guns, have been arrested and charged. McArthur El has been charged with robbery, according to the Sheriff's office, and both were charged with felony murder. "

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-...urder-for-fatally-shooting-14-year-old-sister

 

[JimMIA]

I'd like to see better health care -- the ability to institutionalize people who are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others.

We used to do that, but it was outlawed in the 1970's. Today, most states have laws which allow mandatory temporary commitments for psych evaluations, but not institutionalization.

 

[BayouQueen]

We used to do that, but it was outlawed in the 1970's. Today, most states have laws which allow mandatory temporary commitments for psych evaluations, but not institutionalization.

Yeah, we did. That system wasn't perfect, but what we have now seems so much worse for so many more people. We had a college friend and his wife killed by their troubled son. They tried to get help for him. I have another friend who has a violent, schizophrenic adult child. She can't do anything for him -- can't force him to take meds. It's just a matter of time until something bad happens. It's super sad. And I'm sure there are lots of similar situations out there. Well...there are, because we keep having violent events take place.

With that, I'll leave this thread.

 

[Starport Seven-Five]

How do you limit their access, not allow persons living with minor children to purchase guns? Or strict liability with high penalties for parents or guardians (or any gun owners) when a child uses their gun to commit a school shooting?

I would say more the second.

Firearm owners have a responsibility to properly secure weapons when not in use. A locked safe or even a trigger lock could have prevented the events that occurred this week.

So, according to what the mom posted online (insta, I think), they bought the gun FOR the shooter as an early Christmas present. They need to be charged as well.

Do you have a source on this? It's the first I've heard it.

 

[Kennywood]

What kind of discipline? Kids at our schools get suspended for bullying. I don’t know what else the schools can do.

Kids are no longer afraid of consequences.

 

[bcla]

I would say more the second.

Firearm owners have a responsibility to properly secure weapons when not in use. A locked safe or even a trigger lock could have prevented the events that occurred this week.

Do you have a source on this? It's the first I've heard it.

Depends on who you talk to. At least around here there are laws (some local) that require locked storage and/or trigger locks. A trigger lock is supposed to be provided with every firearm sold, although there might be rules that I'm not quite sure of right now.

However, some claim that their firearms are essential to self defense and specifically don't keep them locked (possibly loaded) in order to have ready access.

 

[JimMIA]

Yeah, we did. That system wasn't perfect, but what we have now seems so much worse for so many more people. We had a college friend and his wife killed by their troubled son. They tried to get help for him. I have another friend who has a violent, schizophrenic adult child. She can't do anything for him -- can't force him to take meds. It's just a matter of time until something bad happens. It's super sad. And I'm sure there are lots of similar situations out there. Well...there are, because we keep having violent events take place.

With that, I'll leave this thread.

I agree with you 100%.

I think this is one of those well-intentioned societal decisions that had a lot of unintended consequences. I also think that a lot of the people "helped" by our current policy would be better off the old way.

It's a good example of what happens when we try to apply "simple" solutions to complex problems.

 

[Colleen27]

I don't know. Access to government sponsored healthcare? <ducks and runs>

You say it tongue in cheek, but there might be something to that. Specifically that kids in most of the rest of the developed world aren't in the pressure-cooker situation someone (GreatLakes?) mentioned upthread in the discussion of the socio-economic profile of school shooters. Kids in other economically advanced countries are not coming of age with an awareness of hypercompetitive college admissions/scholarships, the potential for crippling student debt, and the knowledge that the wrong career choice could mean not being able to afford healthcare in adulthood. Unlike Snapchat and Call of Duty, that likely does factor into the mental well-being of adolescents in a very uniquely American way.

Yeah, we did. That system wasn't perfect, but what we have now seems so much worse for so many more people. We had a college friend and his wife killed by their troubled son. They tried to get help for him. I have another friend who has a violent, schizophrenic adult child. She can't do anything for him -- can't force him to take meds. It's just a matter of time until something bad happens. It's super sad. And I'm sure there are lots of similar situations out there. Well...there are, because we keep having violent events take place.

We do have a tendency to overcorrect, don't we? Instead of a middle ground, we abandoned widespread institutionalization without any sort of plan to provide services to those who need them and would have gotten them (albeit often in less-than-ideal ways) under the old system.

In my county, the same day as the OHS shooting, a young mother drove herself and three kids into the river. There's no official information yet about how/why it happened, but several family members took to social media to vent about how they suspected she was a risk for self-harm and tried to get her help only to come up against a total void in services. Now she's dead and her three kids are on life support. Would they have been better off back in the day when it was easier to have someone institutionalized and treated against their will? It is hard to imagine how it could have been worse. But at the same time, that old way hurt a lot of people who could have integrated into society and left ample space for abuse too, so it is hard to say on balance which is better. It does seem like we should be able to find something between warehousing people or letting them sink or swim with no support, though.