Do we have to make it this easy?

[quade 3]

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/08/we-were-bored-so-we-decided-to-kill-somebody/278858/

Sure, the murderers could have absolutely used other weapons.

But do we have to make it THIS easy?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[normiss 622]

No we don't.

Whoever allowed a minor access to his weapon should be charged.

[airdvr 198]

The author seems to think this could have been avoided somehow.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Lefty 0]

From the article: "The tragic and internationally embarrassing news out of Oklahoma should shame the state's senators into showing some support for background checks."

Does the author know what a background check is? How would it have helped?

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[quade 3]

Well, anything that slowed the kids down, even a little bit, from using a gun to commit the crime -may- have given them second thoughts about committing the crime.

Part of the issue is the ease of doing it.

Now, we don't have all the details, but if the crime was committed at a range greater than a couple of feet from triggerman to victim, it's entirely possible the only reason the kids felt they could do the crime was because they knew there was little chance of getting injured themselves.

Contrast that with say . . . a knife fight or a baseball bat. Sure, three against one is still pretty good odds, but there is a much greater chance of the perps getting injured as well.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

quade

Well, anything that slowed the kids down, even a little bit, from using a gun to commit the crime -may- have given them second thoughts about committing the crime.

Part of the issue is the ease of doing it.

Now, we don't have all the details, but if the crime was committed at a range greater than a couple of feet from triggerman to victim, it's entirely possible the only reason the kids felt they could do the crime was because they knew there was little chance of getting injured themselves.

Contrast that with say . . . a knife fight or a baseball bat. Sure, three against one is still pretty good odds, but there is a much greater chance of the perps getting injured as well.

This has not a damned thing to do with guns
It is a damnable shame ANYONE would try and make it that

This is about personal responsibility
And poor parenting

Hell Paul

you would now punish all legal guns owners for actions of some evil kids, just to placate your own ideology

BS

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

Why do you support evil kids having guns?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

quade

Why do you support evil kids having guns?

Best you can do??

At least you admit it is about the kids and not the tools

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Now, we don't have all the details...

Indeed. Didn't stop your knee from jerking, though. Probably going to turn out to be a problem with parental competence moreso than with guns.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[rushmc 18]

Lefty

Quote

Now, we don't have all the details...

Indeed. Didn't stop your knee from jerking, though. Probably going to turn out to be a problem with parental competence moreso than with guns.

Guns a knee jerking go together

Just like in the Zimmerman case

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

rushmc

***Why do you support evil kids having guns?

At least you admit it is about the kids and not the tools

No. It's also about the tool. That's precisely what I've been talking about.

If I were a punk and decided to commit a random killing, the tool I picked for the job would matter quite a bit. Without access to a gun, I might decide not to commit the crime at all.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

quade

******Why do you support evil kids having guns?

At least you admit it is about the kids and not the tools

No. It's also about the tool. That's precisely what I've been talking about.

If I were a punk and decided to commit a random killing, the tool I picked for the job would matter quite a bit. Without access to a gun, I might decide not to commit the crime at all.

Hmmm

Maybe you had better think about the mind set given what you just posted

kind of removes the gun as any part of if

thanks

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Lefty 0]

quade

Why do you support evil kids having guns?

Since you describe the kids as "evil" and not the guns, you at least understand that it's the person and not the tool that is responsible. Welcome to the logical side of the debate, quade!

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[quade 3]

So, Lefty, why do YOU support evil kids having access to guns?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rhaig 0]

let's make it illegal for teenagers to buy handguns. oh wait...

--
Rob

[rushmc 18]

quade

If I were a punk and decided to commit a random killing

Seems you have identified the REAL issue

And you did not even realize it, did you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

Seems like you didn't read the entire post.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

rhaig

let's make it illegal for teenagers to buy handguns. oh wait...

Who said it was a handgun?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

quade

Seems like you didn't read the entire post.

Does not seem like anything

you wrote it

You identified the problem

then you go off and blame the gun

You cant make this shit up folks

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Lefty 0]

quade

So, Lefty, why do YOU support evil kids having access to guns?

And, like the brilliant flash of a lighting bolt fading into the darkness of night, quade's epiphany was gone.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[quade 3]

Okay, so I'll put you and Rush down as supporting evil kids having easy access to guns.

Awesome.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Fast 0]

quade

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/08/we-were-bored-so-we-decided-to-kill-somebody/278858/

Sure, the murderers could have absolutely used other weapons.

But do we have to make it THIS easy?

How easy was it exactly for them to obtain the weapon? I wasn't able to find that information in the article.

Also:
People under the age of 18 aren't able to legally buy firearms (already a law).
Adults who own firearms can be responsible for the actions of others if they make it too easy for the firearms to be absconded with (already a law).
Murder is against the law (already).
Theft is also already against the law.

I mean, I feel like we have a lot of options for choosing to punish people here.

I also don't believe not owning/having access to a gun would have made a very big difference in the long run. Alternative ending?

~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

[quade 3]

Fast

Also:
People under the age of 18 aren't able to legally buy firearms (already a law).

They can't legally BUY them, but there is no law in Oklahoma saying people under 18 can't OWN them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Oklahoma#Minors_and_Firearms

So, this could be a "perfectly legal" gun . . . in the hands of someone who is demonstrably a psychopath.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[champu 1]

quade

Well, anything that slowed the kids down, even a little bit, from using a gun to commit the crime -may- have given them second thoughts about committing the crime.

Part of the issue is the ease of doing it.

Now, we don't have all the details, but if the crime was committed at a range greater than a couple of feet from triggerman to victim, it's entirely possible the only reason the kids felt they could do the crime was because they knew there was little chance of getting injured themselves.

Contrast that with say . . . a knife fight or a baseball bat. Sure, three against one is still pretty good odds, but there is a much greater chance of the perps getting injured as well.

I have seen nothing to suggest the kids purchased the firearm themselves, so talk about background checks in relation to this incident doesn't make any sense.

From an article linked within your article...

Quote

He said they followed the 22-year-old Lane, a student from Melbourne attending college on a baseball scholarship, in a car and shot him in the back before driving off...

...He was face down on the ground and he was shot in the back with a .22 revolver

So it sounds like a drive-by.

In California there's a crime called "criminal storage of a firearm" which, in an incident like this where someone was seriously injured or killed, would expose the owner of the firearm to felony charges if the gun had not been stored in a way that would have reasonably prevented them from gaining access to it without permission. AB 231 is a pending bill that would make a third degree version of the crime, whereby a person could be charged with a misdemeanor even if no one gets hurt as a result of a minor getting access to the firearm without permission. SB 363 is another pending bill that would extend these laws to all prohibited persons in addition to minors.

It is possible that these changes will encourage people to better secure their firearms against access by minors and prohibited persons, and it doesn't contain any of the invasive manditory inspections that have been provided for in proposed legislation in other states. Accordingly, these two bills were amongst those not included in my brief tirade about stupid gun control legislation that is currently pending in California.

[wolfriverjoe 1,346]

How did the kids get the gun?

Without knowing that, it's impossible to say if background checks could have prevented anything.

And it is illegal for juveniles to purchase any gun. Possession can be legal, under certain circumstances, but purchase isn't.

And if they were killing someone because "they were bored," then I'm going to guess that they didn't legally aquire the gun. But I don't know.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo