Ohio school gunman kills self, wounds 4

[lynamon 0]

I've read almost all of these posts and I feel that I need to add my two cents to try and get it back ontrack ...

What happened is horrible .. the boy was 14 years old .. these kinds of situations are happening more frequently in this day and age which signifies a definite problem.

I was raised the youngest of 4 children by my father. My father never layed a single finger on any of us but all of us kids had a good healthy fear that if we ever screwed up royally that there was the possibility that we would end up with "broken legs" not to mention that our grandmother made us terrified of the "wooden spoon". In this day and age children are taught in school at a very young age of their "rights" which I'm sure has saved many a child brutal beatings at the hands of their parents or guardians .. but ... that has removed the good healthy fear of severe consequence that children raised previously than in this day and age.

I remember one time my 5 year old son .. in trouble from me for doing something wrong as I was disciplining him with a smack on the but (clothed of course ) yelled at me that I was not allowed to hit him and that he was going to tell on me .. and that he had learned it at school. Parents that are in a situation of accusation are guilty before being proven innocent .. they take your child first and ask questions later. I'm not saying that educating children on their rights is wrong .. I'm saying that there is something missing from the equation that has caused some parents to be at the mercy of their children in fear of accusation for disciplining them therefore creating a situation out of balance.

As for guns .. they were not in my life growing up, but later in life I married a man who was a deer hunter and had friends that were deer hunters. They were all a responsible group and even though I was afraid of guns I learned to be responsible with them and always respectful of the damage that they could cause.

I'm now married for a second time to a man that comes from a family of hunters and being in the States the gun laws are different and I have had the totally terrifying priveledge of shooting a 9mm gloc at a shooting range. The feeling of holding that gun in my hands made me want to pee myself ... I knew what it had been created for and the power of that gun created adrenaline in me that was unbelievable.

My point is .. I don't have a problem with gun ownership that is in an environment of responsibility. I believe that guns and children don't mix unless it is under a totally supervised and responsible environment. I believe that it is a parents responsibility to instill in their children the difference between right and wrong and that under most circumstances it is the parents fault when a child becomes a threat to society and that they should be accountable.

My husband has a son who is becoming a teenager and we know that it is our responsibility to get him through it (being a teenager is almost like having a disease of the brain for a short while) and on many occasions he has been provided with a visual that bodily harm will be done to him regardless of the consequences should he screw up royally. Quite frankly ... as a parent I know that no harm will ever become of him by his fathers hand ... but there is something to be said for creating that good healthy fear ...

As a teenager I did silly stupid teenager things ... I think that we all did .. but we always knew that if we ever screwed up that bad .. our parents would be the ones that we would answer to ...

That's all I have to say .. thank you

[natty bumppo 297]

I am suggesting that the army to the best of my understanding (and please interject if I am wrong in my perceptions) has very clear rules and regulations about gun handling, which do not entail leaving them lying around with only the threat of disciplinary action to protect against misuse (I would have thought army disciplinary action is about as tough as it gets, but here again I could be wrong)

That they are professional gun owners and feel this is the safest way to handle guns should surely send some kind of message to all gun owners. If you are suggesting that you or your mates know better than the armed forces, then I am suggesting that you and your mates might not be as responsible as you think you are.

Soldiers don't own the guns ... the government does.

And yes ... I taught firearm courses while living in VA (I'm a recent TX transplant). Most of the worst students were ex-military and good o'l boys. The women I taught were an absloute pleasure to teach.

[Peikko 1,575]

Soldiers don't own the guns ... the government does.

Oh good grief, the armed forces handle guns, rather a lot and for some bizarre reason they think it's a good idea to have rules and regulations. Who owns them is really not the point and you know it.

So, what you are saying then is, that civilians are a so much more responsible gun handlers that they don't need the silly rules and regulations favored by the armed forces? Civilians can leave guns and ammunition lying around the house with no more than the threat of legs being broken should someone pick up a gun when they are not supposed to? Locking guns and ammunition up while not in use is a pointless waste of time?

[Peikko 1,575]

I guess these gun accidents we hear about are just some freak or nature and totally unrelated to these kinds of lax attitudes?

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Why are the gun owners being so coy as to what a gun is? They are designed to protect? Pull the other one, it's got bells on. Guns were designed with the express purpose to kill and maim. Armour is designed to protect. Anyone who owns guns and hides behind the 'it's simply a tool' argument is not someone I would call responsible. I am also somewhat shocked by the rather lax way some people appear to be saying they keep their guns at home. I guess most armies are pretty stupid for having such strict rules for when/how guns and ammunition are stored and used when not in combat zones? Or maybe I have that wrong, weapons are just allowed to lie around in barracks because everyone is so responsible and knows how to handle guns so rules aren't necessary?

As for the guns are lethal weapons thing, well, maybe we should suggest our troops put away their silly guns and start ramming the terrorists with the more deadly Toyota Camry.

so i'm not responsible because i call it a tool?

since it's apparent you're completely ignorant about anything to do with my background, i'll give you a bit of it. i've got about 20 guns. they range from a 12 gauge shotgun to a .410 bore shotgun. a 30-06 to a m-1 (never fired - collector item) to a sks (father's war trophy from vietnam - never fired) all the way down to a .22 rifle. i've got a .44 magnum pistol to a .22 pistol. why so many? guns are designed for a certain purpose. just like you don't take a pistol to go antelope hunting, you don't take a 30-06 rabbit hunting nor a .22 bear hunting (well in the last case, you'll probably only do that once). you don't use a hammer as a screwdriver do you? that's right, you chose the right tool for the job. yet you wish to get on a soapbox and spout your gun grabber drivel and paint gun owners in a negative light because *omg* guns were "..designed with the express purpose to kill and maim" i've yet to read about any gun that was designed for shooting up a school.

also, as i've said earlier in this thread, my guns have a combined total of about 500 years not killing anyone. place the blame where it lies, with the nutcase that decided to go shoot up a school, with the idjit that allowed someone with a history of threats and mental issues to have access to guns, with the parents for not being more involved with their own child as they obviously should have been, and with the school administration for failing to act on the verbal threats he made prior to this incident along with having inoperative metal detectors.

furthermore, i first fired a gun at the age of 9. i got my first gun at the age of 10 - a 12 gauge shotgun that was taller than i was (and it knocked me on my azz every time i fired it). i passed the nra hunter safety course at age 11. and before you ask why 2 years after i was given my first gun by my father, it's because i was in japan at the time and it was against the law for a minor to hunt. i went hunting for the first time in the usa (texas) carrying a shotgun when i was 11 and killed my first dove with my first shot that day. the times previous to that, when i went "hunting" it was in japan when i went with my father but i was a 2 legged bird dog and not carrying a firearm, yet i learning how to from dad. when i started carrying a shotgun and hunting with my father, he would occasionally be questioned about if i was safe to hunt with due to my age by people with us. his answer - my son graduated the nra hunter safety course, did you? quite often, the answer to that was no. i also hunted dove for over 3 years, bagging almost 100, before i finally lost a bird (a bird downed but not found - it crawls off or it falls in brush so thick it can't be found - and sometimes a predator gets to it before the hunter does).

and before you get off on a tangent about it, at no time was i ever unsupervised while hunting. my father was always with me - at times several hundred yards away while we were deer hunting, but that should impress upon even the most dense reader that i had his trust in my handling of the gun i was holding.

i got my first rifle at age 11. my first pistol at age 21. i've now acquired, either through purchase or as a gift from my father a total of about 20 guns. i've taken the concealed carry handgun class in kansas and been investigated by the state of kansas concurrent with that application. i've undergone periodic investigations for the past 27 years by the fbi and other government organizations due to my security clearance. i've fired a m-16 in the military and 95% of the time qualified expert. i've fired a .50 caliber machine gun (m-2) and a 7.62 machingun (m-60) for familiarization. i've gone dove, quail, duck, and goose hunting. i've also gone deer, javalina, and coyote hunting. (those underlined i've bagged btw).

additonally i've shot skeet, trap, and i've done paper target shooting. in my lifetime í'd estimate that at a bare minimum i've fired over 30,000 rounds through a shotgun, 5,000 rifle rounds, about 1,000 rounds of machine guns rounds and about 6,000 pistol rounds (about 1000 rifle, all machine gun, and 500 pistol from the military). i'm well aware of the lethality, dangers, and responsibility that comes with discharge any firearm. and you dare call me "not responsible" just who the hell do you think you are?

furthermore, it's obvous you've never heard of an arms room - that's where the military stores their firearms in garrison.

lastly, guns were also designed to be an equalizer. perhaps as a woman you've forgotten that point.

[natty bumppo 297]

Soldiers don't own the guns ... the government does.

Oh good grief, the armed forces handle guns, rather a lot and for some bizarre reason they think it's a good idea to have rules and regulations. Who owns them is really not the point and you know it.

So, what you are saying then is, that civilians are a so much more responsible gun handlers that they don't need the silly rules and regulations favored by the armed forces? Civilians can leave guns and ammunition lying around the house with no more than the threat of legs being broken should someone pick up a gun when they are not supposed to? Locking guns and ammunition up while not in use is a pointless waste of time?

It was your comment about those who OWNED the guns

I am suggesting that the army to the best of my understanding (and please interject if I am wrong in my perceptions) has very clear rules and regulations about gun handling, which do not entail leaving them lying around with only the threat of disciplinary action to protect against misuse (I would have thought army disciplinary action is about as tough as it gets, but here again I could be wrong)

That they are professional gun owners and feel this is the safest way to handle guns should surely send some kind of message to all gun owners. If you are suggesting that you or your mates know better than the armed forces, then I am suggesting that you and your mates might not be as responsible as you think you are.

And rules and regulations don't exist in the "private" life??? Wow ......

fwiw: the military and police don't handle guns (use) as much as you may imagine.

ever hear a law enforcement officer worry about qualifying?

or ... the words from a law enforcement officer ... can you help me practice to qualify?

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

or ... the words from a law enforcement officer ... can you help me practice to qualify?

i'd be kinda worried if a police officer said that to me

[natty bumppo 297]

or ... the words from a law enforcement officer ... can you help me practice to qualify?

i'd be kinda worried if a police officer said that to me

heard this more than once ... they work and are on duty ... not at the range becoming proficient

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Why are the gun owners being so coy as to what a gun is? They are designed to protect? Pull the other one, it's got bells on. Guns were designed with the express purpose to kill and maim. Armour is designed to protect. Anyone who owns guns and hides behind the 'it's simply a tool' argument is not someone I would call responsible. I am also somewhat shocked by the rather lax way some people appear to be saying they keep their guns at home. I guess most armies are pretty stupid for having such strict rules for when/how guns and ammunition are stored and used when not in combat zones? Or maybe I have that wrong, weapons are just allowed to lie around in barracks because everyone is so responsible and knows how to handle guns so rules aren't necessary?

As for the guns are lethal weapons thing, well, maybe we should suggest our troops put away their silly guns and start ramming the terrorists with the more deadly Toyota Camry.

so i'm not responsible because i call it a tool?

since it's apparent you're completely ignorant about anything to do with my background, i'll give you a bit of it. i've got about 20 guns. they range from a 12 gauge shotgun to a .410 bore shotgun. a 30-06 to a m-1 (never fired - collector item) to a sks (father's war trophy from vietnam - never fired) all the way down to a .22 rifle. i've got a .44 magnum pistol to a .22 pistol. why so many? guns are designed for a certain purpose. just like you don't take a pistol to go antelope hunting, you don't take a 30-06 rabbit hunting nor a .22 bear hunting (well in the last case, you'll probably only do that once). you don't use a hammer as a screwdriver do you? that's right, you chose the right tool for the job. yet you wish to get on a soapbox and spout your gun grabber drivel and paint gun owners in a negative light because *omg* guns were "..designed with the express purpose to kill and maim" i've yet to read about any gun that was designed for shooting up a school.

also, as i've said earlier in this thread, my guns have a combined total of about 500 years not killing anyone. place the blame where it lies, with the nutcase that decided to go shoot up a school, with the idjit that allowed someone with a history of threats and mental issues to have access to guns, with the parents for not being more involved with their own child as they obviously should have been, and with the school administration for failing to act on the verbal threats he made prior to this incident along with having inoperative metal detectors.

furthermore, i first fired a gun at the age of 9. i got my first gun at the age of 10 - a 12 gauge shotgun that was taller than i was (and it knocked me on my azz every time i fired it). i passed the nra hunter safety course at age 11. and before you ask why 2 years after i was given my first gun by my father, it's because i was in japan at the time and it was against the law for a minor to hunt. i went hunting for the first time in the usa (texas) carrying a shotgun when i was 11 and killed my first dove with my first shot that day. the times previous to that, when i went "hunting" it was in japan when i went with my father but i was a 2 legged bird dog and not carrying a firearm, yet i learning how to from dad. when i started carrying a shotgun and hunting with my father, he would occasionally be questioned about if i was safe to hunt with due to my age by people with us. his answer - my son graduated the nra hunter safety course, did you? quite often, the answer to that was no. i also hunted dove for over 3 years, bagging almost 100, before i finally lost a bird (a bird downed but not found - it crawls off or it falls in brush so thick it can't be found - and sometimes a predator gets to it before the hunter does).

and before you get off on a tangent about it, at no time was i ever unsupervised while hunting. my father was always with me - at times several hundred yards away while we were deer hunting, but that should impress upon even the most dense reader that i had his trust in my handling of the gun i was holding.

i got my first rifle at age 11. my first pistol at age 21. i've now acquired, either through purchase or as a gift from my father a total of about 20 guns. i've taken the concealed carry handgun class in kansas and been investigated by the state of kansas concurrent with that application. i've undergone periodic investigations for the past 27 years by the fbi and other government organizations due to my security clearance. i've fired a m-16 in the military and 95% of the time qualified expert. i've fired a .50 caliber machine gun (m-2) and a 7.62 machingun (m-60) for familiarization. i've gone dove, quail, duck, and goose hunting. i've also gone deer, javalina, and coyote hunting. (those underlined i've bagged btw).

additonally i've shot skeet, trap, and i've done paper target shooting. in my lifetime í'd estimate that at a bare minimum i've fired over 30,000 rounds through a shotgun, 5,000 rifle rounds, about 1,000 rounds of machine guns rounds and about 6,000 pistol rounds (about 1000 rifle, all machine gun, and 500 pistol from the military). i'm well aware of the lethality, dangers, and responsibility that comes with discharge any firearm. and you dare call me "not responsible" just who the hell do you think you are?

furthermore, it's obvous you've never heard of an arms room - that's where the military stores their firearms in garrison.

lastly, guns were also designed to be an equalizer. perhaps as a woman you've forgotten that point.

Charles, you spent way to many words on someone that only has the capacity to hear themselves. The words you speak will be picked apart to form the next argument that lies in them but the blame will be projected to you.

Purple, a gun is only as deadly as the intensions of the shooter. The shooter is therefore guilty,not the gun.

your uninhibited speech, was given to you via the bullet. What you seem to love the most (freedom of speech) was not cheap. It was a gift from the people who were here long before both of us. The gift I speak of is just a faint memory that you should get real close to. The reality of it should bring tears to your cheek. When the tears are gone, respect is what is left behind.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Why are the gun owners being so coy as to what a gun is? They are designed to protect? Pull the other one, it's got bells on. Guns were designed with the express purpose to kill and maim. Armour is designed to protect. Anyone who owns guns and hides behind the 'it's simply a tool' argument is not someone I would call responsible. I am also somewhat shocked by the rather lax way some people appear to be saying they keep their guns at home. I guess most armies are pretty stupid for having such strict rules for when/how guns and ammunition are stored and used when not in combat zones? Or maybe I have that wrong, weapons are just allowed to lie around in barracks because everyone is so responsible and knows how to handle guns so rules aren't necessary?

As for the guns are lethal weapons thing, well, maybe we should suggest our troops put away their silly guns and start ramming the terrorists with the more deadly Toyota Camry.

Were you ever in the armed forces or are you talking out your ###?

[Peikko 1,575]

I asked, quite plainly I thought, why those who are gun owners were being coy about what the primary purpose of the gun is. While it is a tool, the purpose of that tool is not to 'protect' but to kill and maim. It was in response to all the bullshit I read about nail guns and cars as deadly weapons.

If (I can use bold too) gun owners are in denial about the purpose of a gun then I think it's quite legitimate to question their gun owning responsibilty. Moreover, guns were never designed to be an equalizer (what my gender has to do with this I have no idea) they were designed win wars, to get the upper hand over those reliant on hand to hand combat weapons. Soldiers are not really intersted in being equal with their enemies (as of course you know) they want to kill them.

My second point, again I thought quite plain was, if it's a good idea to leave guns lying around the house, why do armies have such strict rules concerning guns? ( I would have thought it was quite obvious that I realise armed forces lock up their weapons while they are not in use because that was the purpose of what I was stating, ie, gun owners must take responsibility for their weapons in the same way.). This was in response to this post you made about your father having 100 guns lying around the house and that you didn't misuse them was simply because you knew the consequences. Well you know I still think if anyone is leaving loaded guns lying around the house that is pretty darned irresponsible no matter how well disciplined and expert a gun handler you are.

So, to avoid further confusion, are you saying that your earlier implication that your father's guns were simply left lying around was shall we say, misleading?

Futhermore, I didn't at any point blame what happened in Ohio on irresponsible gun ownership.

Why do I have to have been in the armed forces to know what a gun is?

[natty bumppo 297]

Why are the gun owners being so coy as to what a gun is? They are designed to protect? Pull the other one, it's got bells on. Guns were designed with the express purpose to kill and maim. Armour is designed to protect. Anyone who owns guns and hides behind the 'it's simply a tool' argument is not someone I would call responsible. I am also somewhat shocked by the rather lax way some people appear to be saying they keep their guns at home. I guess most armies are pretty stupid for having such strict rules for when/how guns and ammunition are stored and used when not in combat zones? Or maybe I have that wrong, weapons are just allowed to lie around in barracks because everyone is so responsible and knows how to handle guns so rules aren't necessary?

As for the guns are lethal weapons thing, well, maybe we should suggest our troops put away their silly guns and start ramming the terrorists with the more deadly Toyota Camry.

so i'm not responsible because i call it a tool?

since it's apparent you're completely ignorant about anything to do with my background, i'll give you a bit of it. i've got about 20 guns. they range from a 12 gauge shotgun to a .410 bore shotgun. a 30-06 to a m-1 (never fired - collector item) to a sks (father's war trophy from vietnam - never fired) all the way down to a .22 rifle. i've got a .44 magnum pistol to a .22 pistol. why so many? guns are designed for a certain purpose. just like you don't take a pistol to go antelope hunting, you don't take a 30-06 rabbit hunting nor a .22 bear hunting (well in the last case, you'll probably only do that once). you don't use a hammer as a screwdriver do you? that's right, you chose the right tool for the job. yet you wish to get on a soapbox and spout your gun grabber drivel and paint gun owners in a negative light because *omg* guns were "..designed with the express purpose to kill and maim" i've yet to read about any gun that was designed for shooting up a school.

also, as i've said earlier in this thread, my guns have a combined total of about 500 years not killing anyone. place the blame where it lies, with the nutcase that decided to go shoot up a school, with the idjit that allowed someone with a history of threats and mental issues to have access to guns, with the parents for not being more involved with their own child as they obviously should have been, and with the school administration for failing to act on the verbal threats he made prior to this incident along with having inoperative metal detectors.

furthermore, i first fired a gun at the age of 9. i got my first gun at the age of 10 - a 12 gauge shotgun that was taller than i was (and it knocked me on my azz every time i fired it). i passed the nra hunter safety course at age 11. and before you ask why 2 years after i was given my first gun by my father, it's because i was in japan at the time and it was against the law for a minor to hunt. i went hunting for the first time in the usa (texas) carrying a shotgun when i was 11 and killed my first dove with my first shot that day. the times previous to that, when i went "hunting" it was in japan when i went with my father but i was a 2 legged bird dog and not carrying a firearm, yet i learning how to from dad. when i started carrying a shotgun and hunting with my father, he would occasionally be questioned about if i was safe to hunt with due to my age by people with us. his answer - my son graduated the nra hunter safety course, did you? quite often, the answer to that was no. i also hunted dove for over 3 years, bagging almost 100, before i finally lost a bird (a bird downed but not found - it crawls off or it falls in brush so thick it can't be found - and sometimes a predator gets to it before the hunter does).

and before you get off on a tangent about it, at no time was i ever unsupervised while hunting. my father was always with me - at times several hundred yards away while we were deer hunting, but that should impress upon even the most dense reader that i had his trust in my handling of the gun i was holding.

i got my first rifle at age 11. my first pistol at age 21. i've now acquired, either through purchase or as a gift from my father a total of about 20 guns. i've taken the concealed carry handgun class in kansas and been investigated by the state of kansas concurrent with that application. i've undergone periodic investigations for the past 27 years by the fbi and other government organizations due to my security clearance. i've fired a m-16 in the military and 95% of the time qualified expert. i've fired a .50 caliber machine gun (m-2) and a 7.62 machingun (m-60) for familiarization. i've gone dove, quail, duck, and goose hunting. i've also gone deer, javalina, and coyote hunting. (those underlined i've bagged btw).

additonally i've shot skeet, trap, and i've done paper target shooting. in my lifetime í'd estimate that at a bare minimum i've fired over 30,000 rounds through a shotgun, 5,000 rifle rounds, about 1,000 rounds of machine guns rounds and about 6,000 pistol rounds (about 1000 rifle, all machine gun, and 500 pistol from the military). i'm well aware of the lethality, dangers, and responsibility that comes with discharge any firearm. and you dare call me "not responsible" just who the hell do you think you are?

furthermore, it's obvous you've never heard of an arms room - that's where the military stores their firearms in garrison.

lastly, guns were also designed to be an equalizer. perhaps as a woman you've forgotten that point.

I'll second this .... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

fwiw ... Sam Colt made the equalizer

A firearm is a tool .... pure and simple ... a tool. Like any tool it can be used for good or bad. The individual using the tool can decide how it will be used ... for good or bad.

btw: You should be thankful for firearms and the impact they had on the industrial revolution and interchangeability of parts. Do some research ... you will be surprised.

Oh btw: ... I've shot thousands of rounds in rifle, pistol, and shotgun.

Am I a threat? Am I irresponsible?

Bring it on .... !!!!

And ... the B!tch I saw today in her SUV with her stupid maneuver while talking on a mobile was more of a worry to me and others than questions of a firearm.

I'm glad I was paying attention and had good brakes. Geez ... hang up and drive !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Why are the gun owners being so coy as to what a gun is? They are designed to protect? Pull the other one, it's got bells on. Guns were designed with the express purpose to kill and maim. Armour is designed to protect. Anyone who owns guns and hides behind the 'it's simply a tool' argument is not someone I would call responsible. I am also somewhat shocked by the rather lax way some people appear to be saying they keep their guns at home. I guess most armies are pretty stupid for having such strict rules for when/how guns and ammunition are stored and used when not in combat zones? Or maybe I have that wrong, weapons are just allowed to lie around in barracks because everyone is so responsible and knows how to handle guns so rules aren't necessary?

As for the guns are lethal weapons thing, well, maybe we should suggest our troops put away their silly guns and start ramming the terrorists with the more deadly Toyota Camry.

Were you ever in the armed forces or are you talking out your ###?

Answer: NOPE.

Maybe some pics of my dead ancestors, that died in the fight might be effective? Or will they be called "fools"? Its called the gift that just keeps on giving.

[Peikko 1,575]

You continue to play up the dangers of the motor car and play down the dangers of guns. However, to play down what a gun is, well, I find that bizarre from someone who teaches gun handling.

Why all this anger? I have just exposed what I think are the disingenuous arguments you have been using to support gun ownership. If you are prepared to call a spade a spade, I would be more prepared to listen to what you have to say.

Edited October 12, 2007 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Ok, I quit, you are quite determined to mislead and misunderstand. You continue to play up the dangers of the motor car and play down the dangers of guns. However, to play down what a gun is, well, I find that bizarre from someone who teaches gun handling.

Purple, people are dangerous, not guns.