A 14-year-old boy allegedly fatally shot his older sister in Florida after a family argument over Christmas presents, officials said Tuesday.
The teen had been out shopping on Christmas Eve with Abrielle Baldwin, his 23-year-old sister, as well as his mother, 15-year-old brother and sister’s children, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said during a news conference.
The teenage brothers got into an argument about who was getting more Christmas presents.
“They had this family spat about who was getting what and what money was being spent on who, and they were having this big thing going on in this store,” Gualtieri said.
Just as the architects of the Constitution intended
As the 2nd amendment says:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, well-regulated militias shall have the right to keep and bear arms. Also, in a twist completely unrelated to that other sentence, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. I’m talking rifles, muskets, flintlocks, hell, even futuristic weapons nobody’s invented yet. Not part of a militia? Doesn’t matter. Completely unregulated? That’s right. Also, by ‘people’ we mean everyone: kids, witches, the addled, it’s a free for all!
Of course, most people only know the final trimmed-down edited version of that amendment. The original was much better, IMO.
Your command of the English language is… incomplete. Read this, then re-read your comment:
https://constitution.org/1-Constitution/2ll/schol/2amd_grammar.htm
At 14 and 15, both of these kids are too young to legally own a pistol in Florida.
https://www.fdle.state.fl.us/FPP/FAQs2.aspx
So, yeah, pretty sure they aren’t concerned with the Constitution.
You’ve made an excellent point, just not the one you think
You’re playing chess with pigeons, I wouldn’t bother
Trying to regulate the weapons used in our hellscape dystopia is just a method of maintaining the hellscape and avoiding any real change to society at large.
avoiding any real change to society at large.
So which changes would you suggest to help solve this problem?
That those kids got the guns illegally and would have done so regardless of what laws were in place? That point?
Ah yes, the “If it’s not going to stop 100% of the problem, let’s not do it at all” bullshit.
That old chestnut.
If random check stops don’t stop 100% of drunk drivers, why do them at all. Your just punishing the drivers who AREN’T driving drunk!
If seatbelts don’t save 100% of lives, why regulate that we wear them. Muh Freedums!!
It bullshit excuses made by people with literally nothing of any real sense to fall back on.
Not on that guy’s side, but he didn’t strictly say that we shouldn’t have those laws.
He said that if you’re siteing a case where we did have those laws and a bad thing happened as an example for why we need laws like that in place to stop the bad thing from happening, it falls a little flat.
Not that the idea of having laws like that is bad, but citing individual cases is flawed, as no amount of regulatory structure will ever prevent 100% of cases.
To frame it a different way, I could argue that there’s literally no country on earth with strong enough gun laws, because there’s no country with zero gun deaths. I could argue that we need random searches of people homes to try and find guns, or imprisoning people who talk about guns, because the current laws clearly aren’t good enough because people are still getting shot. Doesn’t matter if it was only 1 incident in the past 30yrs. Still happened, so we need stricter laws.
That’s obviously an absurd level of hyperbole, and I want to reiterate that I’m all for regulation on firearms. Just wanted to point out that the core argument here is unideal.
The guy said “would have done so regardless of what laws were in place”.
As in, this happened, and there are already laws, so there’s no point in stronger laws or more restrictions.
That’s like saying “Sure, there are hundreds of fatalities in this factory, but they already get 10c fines whenever there’s an at-fault accident. The accidents would have happened regardless of the fines! There’s no point in higher fines since the fines have shown they’re not working!”
That’s all valid, but I think you’ve missed my point.
While I disagree with “the laws did nothing so why have laws,” I also disagree with, “the laws didn’t work, so we need harsher laws.” Both are flawed logically.
There is, in fact, a level of restriction that goes too far in the name of preventing crime. We could lock everyone in jail for instance, as people in cages can’t commit crimes (ymmv). That’s obviously a bad idea though, for many reasons.
And I’m with you. I think we need to evaluate what that right balance is. What I was pushing back on was the idea that, “if there’s even one gun death ever, then the laws didn’t go far enough, and we need more restrictions,” which I took to be the sentiment of the OP. That lack of nuance worries me is all.
I don’t know if the gun laws that were violated were good enough or not. I didn’t look them up, tbh. But you can have all the laws in the world, and have them be completely useless if they aren’t properly enforced. Maybe the laws are actually good, and the enforcement mechanism is flawed? Maybe both are good and this is just an unfortunate side effect of it being impossible to police everyone all the time. Or maybe the laws themselves are flawed and the OP is right that something needs changing. I don’t know. But I do know that it’s a big issue with a lot of nuance, and that a knee jerk reaction of “we need more laws” is unhelpful at best and detrimental at worst.
Imagine applying that logic to anything else:
“He would have been murdered regardless of what laws were in place. There’s no reason to change the penalty for murder! The 10c fine already ensures that only criminals will murder other people.”
“The city already has a firefighter, and the city block still burned down! What’s the point in adding more firefighters if we already have a firefighter and we still get major fires?”
…
The kids got the guns illegally because it’s incredibly easy to get illegal guns in the US. The biggest reason for that is that it’s so incredibly easy to get legal guns too. In places like Japan or England where it’s hard to get legal guns, it’s extremely hard to get illegal guns, so the criminals tend not to use illegal guns.
If “would have done so regardless” were true, there should be no difference in gun crime in the UK vs the US. But, they’re not. It’s not because the US has far more of a problem with mental illness or something, it’s because the tool designed for killing is harder to get.
Well, in MY state random stops ARE illegal. Thanks Oregon! Frankly, I’m surprised more states haven’t done that.
https://romanolawpc.com/oregon-dui-checkpoints/
There are things that CAN be done, you just have to start with rejecting the idea of “hurrr durrr take all the guns” because that can’t be done due to the 2nd amendment.
In THIS case, we know the two kids already had priors for car burglaries.
So #1) You find out who legally owned those guns, then you charge them with improper storage and/or failure to report a stolen weapon.
#2) When kids are arrested for a crime like burglary, you search their homes to make sure weapons weren’t anything that were burgled.
“The solution to ensuring our freedom to own guns is to restrict all our other freedoms. “
Our other freedoms aren’t restricted though.
Wow you’re a moron
Really? Well, what would your solution be?
Keep in mind, banning guns is not an option because of the 2nd Amendment and changing the 2nd amendment is currently a political impossibility.
Sooo? Thoughts?
regardless of what laws were in place?
Oh come on, regardless of where you stand on the issue, you can’t think of any change in law could contain that would prevent someone from getting a gun?
FTA:
“Both teens have prior arrests for car burglaries.”
Seems likely they stole the guns from cars, so maybe make it illegal to keep your gun in your car?
Hard to say until the gun origins are traced back, but they weren’t legally purchased by or for the kids.
Seems likely they stole the guns from cars, so maybe make it illegal to keep your gun in your car?
Hmm, so the source of the guns were the cars that were broken into. Hmm, yes. So what law can you imagine that would have even prevented the option for those gun owners to keep guns in their cars? C’mon, you’ve got this. Hint: How did the car owners get the guns?
Nothing that could be blocked because of the 2nd amendment. You can’t prevent people from legally owning guns.
Now, if you want to get rid of the 2nd amendment, we have a process for that…
First you get 290 votes in the House, then you get 67 votes in the Senate, then you get ratification from 38 states, so all 25 Biden states +13 Trump states.
Good luck with that!
maybe make it illegal to keep your gun in your car?
Unfortunately this is not possible. There are many businesses and such that have signs to the effect of “no guns in here.” In some states those signs hold no legal weight, but in some they do. In states where they do hold legal weight, your choice becomes
-
Just never carry because the grocery store I’ll be in for 15 minutes out of my day has a sign they think will keep mass murderers out (spoiler warning: mass murderers target those signs. Not that it’s more likely you’ll get shot there necessarily, just that their signs only matter to people who aren’t about to murder 25 people, as the murderer has other crimes to worry about vs me, where I just want some damn nuggies so prison actually matters to me.)
-
Carry in the store illegally. Honestly more people are doing this than you think, but as I said in some states this can become an issue for you.
-
Leave it in the car while I’m in the grocery store. Legal, not exactly safe, but since I am literally legally forced to be unsafe: “not my fault.” If you want to charge people with leaving a gun in a locked car and then the gun gets stolen, you have to at least meet halfway and let people with a permit carry at all times and not force them to leave it in the car. You may say "just go to a competing business. Well the way my state law is set up you can’t carry in ANY bank regardless of permission, any government building, and a few more places. And I’m fine with either, make them leave it and no charge or let them carry it and charge if they don’t, but I’m not fine with “you have to leave that in the car even though you’d rather leave it in the holster, and if it gets stolen we’ll put you in prison for life.”
This is not possible
Yes it is, you just don’t like the idea of being inconvenienced by public safety laws.
mass murderers target those [gun-free] signs
[citation needed]
Carry in the store illegally. Honestly more people are doing this than you think
This is an excellent reason to strengthen gun laws and make some examples out of the people who decide to violate the law.
If it gets stolen we’ll put you in prison for life.
Show me where this has ever happened (life in prison for having a gun stolen from you)
It never fails that the pro-gun argument is always just loaded with dishonest hyperbole. Guess that’s expected from a cause that has zero public benefit. Part of your argument is to just casually admit that people are illegally carrying guns all the time, and you say it like it’s some sort of argument in favor of guns…
Agreed, folks who have an actual permit to carry should not be barred from normal businesses. Courthouses, government buildings, I totally get that. But leaving a gun in a grocery store parking lot is inherently more dangerous than a permitted person keeping it under their personal control.
Have you considered trying penile extension surgery instead?
-
you know those minors, always committing major felonies no matter whatcha try to do.
FTA:
“Both teens have prior arrests for car burglaries.”
So, yeah, apparently so… probably where they got the guns.
Guess what, if those kids were breaking into cars in London, there’s 0 chance they would’ve acquired guns that way (not to mention, it’s irresponsible to store a gun in a car to begin with).
England doesn’t have a 2nd Amendment, but yeah, kids killing kids seems pretty universal:
What if I told you it’s much easier to use and illegal gun when they are readily available?
Only country where this happens regularly to not have figured anything out. Stop embarrassing yourself and just post thoughts and prayers
USA is not the only country with civilian gun ownership and carry being legal.
So with such crime stats it should be your first thought that the problem is narrower (EDIT: and more USA-specific) than people having guns.
Unless you’ve already made up your mind and now just want to somehow nail facts to it.
I didn’t make any argument about legal gun ownership. Guns are legal in my country and this doesn’t happen.
Read into arguments much? You had already set your mind on what I was saying before you read it
What if I told you it’s much easier to use and illegal gun when they are readily available?
Seemed to mean that you tie availability of legal guns with availability of illegal guns, which is not wrong, but in a working system it is insignificant.
That Jordan Lund is too stupid to insult
The solution is to examine how these guns got out of the legal system and into the illegal system.
The 2nd Amendment isn’t going anywhere so you can take that pipedream off the table barring 290 votes in the House, 67 votes in the Senate, and ratification from 38 states.
So what CAN we do?
Well…
#1) Hold gun owners accountable for storing a gun in something like a car that can be easily be broken into or stolen.
#2) When kids are arrested for something like burglary, you search their homes for weapons.
If the US had gun laws similar to the rest of the world then the chances of children getting hold of them would be far lower.
True, but that’s not going to happen as long as the 2nd Amendment is in place and there are close to 1/2 a billion guns in the country.
Yeah, if only there weren’t so many millions of guns in this country that literally any pubescent dumbshit and his brother can get one illegally without any effort! But yeah no the system is flawless and the problem unfixable cool yeah I agree.
I’ve seen estimates of 475 million+ guns in a country of 330 million+ people, so, yeah. Tons of guns and not enough people taking securing them seriously.
These kids being car burglars makes perfect sense too… here’s a stat from my city:
https://katu.com/news/local/car-gun-thefts-increase-portland-police-say
"Kapp said nearly half of stolen gun reports from that last 15 months were firearms stolen from personal vehicles.
“That’s 47% of guns are stolen because they were stored in a vehicle; either the vehicle was broken into or the vehicle is stolen with a gun inside. That is a huge number,” said Kapp.
Kapp said gun owners should also have documentation, like serial numbers, in secure, safe spaces."
You would think by now that people would know “Don’t leave ANYTHING of value in your car!” but apparently not!
deleted by creator
EXACTLY RIGHT! That’s why need to outlaw Abortion, have speed limits, make fraud illegal, make murder and illegal and keep all other laws in place! Because laws DON’T WORK!
Not owned, but easy and unhindered access to one. That is the problem : Way too many guns for way too little brains.
Agreed, and based on their rap sheets for car burglaries, a likely source of the guns.
Which goes back to the two points I made in other posts:
-
Any dumbass who keeps a gun unsecured in their car needs to be held accountable.
-
When these kids were busted for burglaries, their homes needed to be searched for any and all stolen goods ESPECIALLY stolen guns.
-
I don’t recall the forefathers mentioning the age for gun ownership. Toddlers need to protect themselves against perverted republicans. #babyArms
It wasn’t the founders, it was the Gun Control Act of 1968 that blocked anyone under the age of 18 from owning a long gun and anyone under the age of 21 from owning a pistol.
Ignore the mob. They know nothing but insults. It’s a damn echo chamber in here.
Fuck the United States. Only place in the world this fucking shit happens regularly , because a bunch of small dick Republicans won’t give up their guns.
Republicans were so lucky to find the gun issue
They don’t give a shit about guns. But at long as they can keep their voters riled up about it, they won’t have the time to think about real issues like why they’re so poor, why they will go bankrupt if they get really sick, etc etc etc.
Guns is like religion, it’s just another method of control where the target doesn’t even know they’re being controlled
There was a time when the NRA fought for a two-day waiting period on handgun sales and limits on concealed weapons permits. And a time when then–California Governor Ronald Reagan signed legislation forbidding the carrying of loaded firearms in public. Before gun control became a progressive cause, it was a right-wing staple, and it was aimed squarely at the rights of African-Americans nationwide.
In Florida, white “citizens patrols” were permitted to search the homes of free African-Americans for guns “and other offensive or improper weapons, and may lawfully seize and take away such arms, weapons, and ammunition.” The message was clear: guns — like the ballot box, marriage, and the right to free assembly — were for white Americans only.
That conflict — between the fears of racist whites and the needs of African-Americans to defend themselves — arose again in the late 1960s. The leaders of the Civil Rights Movement recognized that the need for self-defense still existed — in fact, Martin Luther King Jr. applied for (and was denied) a concealed carry permit. Recounting his memories of “Freedom Summer” and the Civil Rights Movement, Charles E. Cobb Jr., former field secretary of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, said, “I know from personal experience and the experiences of others, that guns kept people alive, kept communities safe, and all you have to do to understand this is simply think of black people as human beings and they’re gonna respond to terrorism the way anybody else would.”
On May 2, 1967, a group of Black Panthers took to the steps of the California Legislature carrying revolvers, shotguns, and pistols and read a statement saying, “The time has come for black people to arm themselves against this terror before it is too late.” In a direct response to the incident, Governor Ronald Reagan signed the Mulford Act, banning the open carry of loaded weapons, barely two months later. Guns were “a ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will,” he said.
As former NRA president Harlon Carter said in 1975, the use of guns by violent criminals or the mentally ill was simply the “price we pay for freedom.” In 1980, the NRA endorsed Ronald Reagan — 13 years after Reagan had signed the first open-carry ban in the country.
White people may be more likely to carry a gun, but black people are more likely to be jailed for it.
Exactly. And they keep sowing this myth that the guns will be taken away at any point in time, but “you should keep them in case we become tyrannical!” And the definition of what is and isn’t tyranny is always subject to change, but usually if it’s tyranny against people the base doesn’t like, then it’s not tyranny.
Yeah the same people are turning around and fully supporting a presidential candidate who is openly saying he will be a dictator when elected.
Just an unbelievable level of stupid.
They want someone who is going to be a dictator to the people they don’t like. Ask the SA how they were rewarded for their service to the Fuhrer. Oh, you can’t, because they died. Their reward was arrest and summary execution once their usefulness had ended.
They care about the bribes from gun manufacturers.
Find? More like manufacture.
You need to be upvoted to the skies
Republicans were so lucky to find the gun issue
The best part is that Dems could take it away from them at any time by just deciding not to fight them on that one with little lost in the process.
Just out of curiosity, what does that mean?
That means that gun control as an issue only exists because Dems allow it to exist.
It’s the easiest and largest impact wedge issue for the GOP because gun control is basically a no go so they have to do very little to actually prevent it while it garners them a comparatively large number of wedge issue voters.
Dems would lose relatively little by just dropping the issue almost entirely while denying a powerful wedge issue to the GOP.
Well Technically… Of the 150 plus democracies on the planet only three have a constitutional right to firearms. The USA, Mexico and Guatemala… Of those Mexico actually has actually fairly heavy restrictions on what firearms are covered by the Constitution and which are restricted to police and military use.
So realistically this sort of thing happens in the US and Guatemala… If it is any consolation the US is flagging way behind Guatemala in gun related deaths when you adjust for population?
Well technically, Czech Republic had a constitutional amendment regarding gun rights passed in 2021.
Oh did they? I will have to amend my notes! Good catch!
Careful there, lemmy has a bunch of gun nut weirdos
Who gives a shit what they think.
Do you post on skinhead social because Gun Control Is Rooted in Disarming Black Americans
oh do kindly fuck off.
Libertarian reactionaries in general.
exactly 8, it seems
It’s actually more like 40%-50% of the country though.
Dude I lean center left…it’s not just Republicans that care about gun rights you dumbass. LOT of gun owners also are democrats. Stop trying to one side an issue. Thenissue isn’t guns it’s literally the owners and yea I’ll be damned if I give up my firearms cause you want me to. My guns stay locked up in my safe at all times. My kids know they aren’t toys and can seriously hurt someone. I keep the keys to that safe with me.
Secondly taking away legal and lawful gun owners guns will NOT stop people who don’t follow the law from obtaining guns and doing bad shit with them. Grow the fuck up.
I bet it’s also Republicans fault that BOTH these kids have been arrested for car burglary too?
If it wasn’t a gun, I guarantee it would have turned violent with any other weapon. Would you be this riled up if you read the same story but it was about a stabbing?
The people in this story are the problem, not the weapon used
It is definitely the person who pulled the trigger’s fault, but I don’t understand why we would want minors whose brains haven’t fully developed to have point-and-kill weapons.
You point out how awful these kids are, and then post in support of making it easier for them to kill. That’s strange to me.
Although I guess it makes sense, because you also seem to imply that deaths aren’t more likely to occur if guns are involved. I just can’t agree with you there.
Again, this shit only happens in the US. Guns are a big part of the problem. Don’t be fucking dense.
Again, if you weren’t reading about a shooting, you’d be reading about a stabbing or another violent attack.
Would you be this riled up if you read the same story but it was about a stabbing?
How to protect yourself from a knife attack: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JfAYyZoVy5o
(Note how this doesn’t work if they have a gun)
Oh?
You’re sure (guarantee) that this would have been a stabbing? What makes you such an expert?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
in multiple separate comments you have demonstrated a total inability to think beyond half a layer of depth. you are out of your element and have a great deal to learn. I truly hope that one day you do.
So we’re just going to keep repeating this exact conversation every single time this happens. Because other countries don’t have systems, or people with fingers.
“i think i’ll be a mouthpiece today, that’s all i’m good for”
“There is no way to prevent this from happening” says only country in which this regularly happens.
Jesus.
The 14 year old brother shot his 23 year old sister.
Then the 15 year old brother shot the 14 year old brother, and disposed of the handgun.
The 23 year old sister is dead. The 14 year old brother is stable.
The 14 year old is being charged with first degree murder. The 15 year old is being charged with attempted first degree murder.
The sister had a child, which was not harmed.
Everything about this is messed up and tragic
…and preventable. Emotional teenagers should not have access to firearms!
Emotional teenagers should not have access to firearms!
Emotional humans should not have access to firearms, except under exceptional circumstances.
The US military knows this and it’s why most people on military bases are not allowed to walk around armed, though they all have access to weapons when necessary.
Well legally they don’t have access to firearms. They also shouldn’t have access to Heroin, and legally they don’t, but it killed 3 of my friends before we even graduated, so in practice…
They also shouldn’t be out stealing cars.
Guns shouldn’t be in cars if they’re not at least locked somehow
And if your gun is stolen from your car, civil liability should remain attached to you in perpetuity. Teach you to lose your fucking gun.
As a gun owner, yea I fucking agree. Get a co cenceal carry and carry that shit in and out of the car. Di not leave and and do not leave it visible. Responsible gun owners don’t have any of these issues. But look at the area the kids were in and the illegal shit they were already doing, that shit is being overlook by almost everyone here just cause a gun was involved. Ffs.
honestly if your gun is stolen you should be charged with anything that happens with it too. thats actually genius no sarcasm. and an extra charge that it was able to be stolen in the first place.
Stuff getting stolen is a fact of life no matter how secure. Maybe in cases of negligence, but if it’s locked up then someone breaking the lock shouldn’t mean you’re considered a party to the crime they use it for
This whole thing is tragic and beyond dumb.
It would be tragic if this didn’t feel like reading a weather report.
It’s also tragic because it feels like reading a weather report
The 23 year old sister had 2 children, one of which was already 6 years old, if my reading skills aren’t failing me.
he’s going to kill his uncle when he’s like 12
This reads like a shitty math problem.
Jamal, 14M, shoots his 23 year old sister, Abriele, dead. Abriele had a 6 year old son How many years will it take for the 6 year old to be old enough to kill his Uncle in cold blood on Christmas? And what age will Jamal be?
Apparently the sister died from drowning on her OWN blood.
Anyway, merry jolly Christmas everyone!
The sister had a child, which was not harmed.
Arguable
The sister had a child, which was not harmed.
I thought you said “armed”, and if only… if that kid had been packing he could have been the good guy with a gun who would have mowed down all the bad guys and saved the day.
What a wonderful family, with a lot of stable geniuses!
That family reunion is going to awkward AF next year.
More guns in the hands of the other children would have kept this travesty from occurring. #hopesandprayers
'Murica!
If the 11-month old was armed, all this could have been stopped!
15-year-old brother and sister’s children
This sentence is a great argument for the Oxford comma.
The sentence is a great argument for editorial oversight. How’d a copy editor let that go to print???
Copy editor got laid off
*ChatGPT please copy edit this for me"
This whole article was confusing for me.
There are 2 brothers and 1 sister, who has her own child.
14 year old brother shoots 23 year old sister.
15 year old brother shoots 14 year old brother in retaliation.
Writing isn’t difficult, but most journalists suck donkey shit at what they do.
This isn’t a series. Oxford commas are for a series.
I got a little lazy with the copy/paste. The first item of the series isn’t in the quote.
Go into any of the relationship subreddits today and for the next few days and you will see countless Americans melting down into various degrees of rage and bitterness over Xmas presents.
It’s like this very goddamn year.
Can anyone explain this part of the culture to me?
I’m not saying I hate all Americans or anything ridiculous like that, the cast majority of Americans I’ve met are good hearted people but when it comes to Xmas and in what I’m given understand is the modern vernacular: “y’all cray.”
Don’t any of your families still watch the Charlie Brown Christmas? Because you really should.
Go toxic places to read toxic things. I’ve never heard of this. But also I can’t imagine going to a relationship board and expecting to come away with anything but misanthropy regardless of time of year.
Materialism is really big with a lot of people. My in-laws kids are spoiled rotten and only accept big brand name stuff because that’s all their parents give them for Christmas and Birthdays. Same people who can’t afford to pay their mortgage and are likely to lose the house in a few months.
I like present-less holidays. Better to focus on just being with people I find. Also helps if there’s a lot of good, homemade food.
I like present-less holidays. Better to focus on just being with people I find.
presence > presents
For me it’s all about consumables and experience. You like sauerkraut? I just made you a jar. You like classical music? Here are two tickets to the symphony. I just avoid stuff unless it’s like plates for someone who moved into their first apartment.
Americans live in a state of constant stress that is satiated by material possessions and trying to impress or be better than others. These kids were just trying to get their dose of imbalanced brain chemicals
There are 335 million people in the United States.
One asshat shot someone.
I’m not defending guns, shitty culture, or shitty people, but this is clearly a case where this kid has some sort of mental disorder. Literally hundreds of millions of families watched Charlie Brown and went the entire holiday without murdering each other
There were 89 shootings in the united states on Christmas day. Source with incident reports for each one.
89 is 0.00002670367% of 333,287,557.
Each one of the 89 shootings was one too many.
Any idea how many shootings were on Christmas day in Australia, Canada or Switzerland where a lot of people have guns too?
By the way, if you look at shootings in Australia before and after semi-automatic rifles got banned in 1996 you know how to improve the situation in the US.
Someone in Prague just killed 15 people with a bolt action firearm…
We have an issue with our society, not our firearms.
No, you have an issue with your society and with firearms.
Our firearms have been around for a lot longer than we have had these recent mass shootings issue…
Where did you see that it was a bolt action rifle? I couldn’t find any real details on the weapons used. I’m looking for sensible gun policies to advocate for in the US and a mass shooting with a bolt action refutes my “limit the rate of fire” idea.
There is a video out there, and it shows him cycling the action. It was basically a dressed up hunting rifle he used.
If you’re actually wanting to solve our violence problem, you go to the root of our societies issues, not the tool used. All of these things below would curb our violence as a whole 1000xs more than any new gun control can.
We can start with:
-
Single payer healthcare
-
Ending the War on Drugs
-
Ending Qualified immunity
-
Properly funding our schools and not just rich white suburb schools.
-
Build more schools and hire more teachers for proper pay so the class room sizes aren’t 30-40 kids for one teacher.
-
UBI (at least start talking about it) once AI takes over most of the blue collar jobs.
-
End for profit prisons
-
Enforce the laws already on the books
-
Make sure there are safety nets for poor families so the kids don’t turn to violence/gangs to survive.
-
Increase the minimum wage
-
Recreate our mental healthcare so kids don’t turn to the internet for support. And to help veterans not end up as a suicide number.
-
Actively make a law to solidify Pro-choice rights. More unwanted children do not help our situation.
-
Banning Insider Trading for Congress
-
Term limits
-
Ranked Choice Voting so we can move away from a 2 party system
-
Does it not seem reasonable to take away guns while we solve our society issues ?
Removed by mod
Lol uhh…ok…yes the videos online are just fake news right?
By the way, if you look at shootings in Australia before and after semi-automatic rifles got banned in 1996 you know how to improve the situation in the US.
I’m not sure if you’re aware of this, but you can also shoot people with bolt actions, lever actions; and SA, DA, and S/DA revolvers.
See, if it were 90 I could understand you being upset…, but it’s just 89! are we really going to make a scene about 89 totally avoidable deaths ?? when we could just enjoy Christmas with the children we might lose tomorrow ?
(thanks for the source)
No it is not clearly a case where the kid has some sort of mental disorder. You know literally nothing about this person.
I would probably bet that this kid made a stupid split second choice in the heat of the moment about something that (partially likely due to raging teenage hormones) probably seemed very important at the time, and the guilt will haunt him until the end of his life (which, statistically speaking, just got much shorter on average).
This is exactly why guns are so dangerous. It gives people (in this case, a literal child without a fully developed brain) the capability to make a decision to end another life in a split second.
You really think any sane rational FOURTEEN year old would just shoot their sister solely because of a Christmas gift?
I’m not saying 14 year olds have adult mental capacity and decision making … but by that age you KNOW what a gun goes and you KNOW you can’t take it back.
Either there’s more to the story or this kid definitely has some kind of mental disorder or mental distress that they needed to see a therapist about.
Maybe the more to the story is that he thought he could just scare her by pointing the gun at her or her thought it was empty … and it wasn’t/the gun went off. If that’s the case, then the parents really screwed up having a gun in the house, not teaching the kid anything about gun safety, and allowing the kid across to the gun (granted again by 14 you’re pretty smart … the average 14 year old could probably figure out the code or were the keys are kept on a gun safe because I know most people do not follow best practices with any passwords or keys).
And before you make any assumptions like you did with the other person, I’ve voted for Democrats in every election, donated some significant money to their campaigns, and I do not own a gun and do not have any restrictions that prevent me from owning a gun, I’ve just decided that for me … particularly with living alone and a (granted not recent) history of depression that included suicidal thoughts … they’re not a good thing to have around. I avoid alcohol for similar reasons.
Thoughts and prayers might be a meaningless response but a huge block of the population has said “we’re not giving up our guns” … come to think of it … just like a huge block of the population has said “we’re not giving up our alcohol” (as is their right at the polls).
There is a majority that would like to see some common sense gun reform and we should do that. However, I believe the right has a point about mental health and guns. What they don’t have is the willingness to fund mental health systems and instead they blame all the mental health issues on a degraded culture (🙄). We need to bring mental health back into the conversation with information from professionals. They also have a point about teaching kids about gun safety, if we’re going to keep guns, then it’s a public disservice to not teach kids (or at least the kids of gun owners) “this is what a gun is, don’t point it at anything you don’t want to kill” and “there’s a difference between pretend and reality, these are never for pretend” as a baseline.
Yes. Countless stories of children murdering their parents over this stuff. It’s very common. Remember that the country is big with lots of people so you’re going to see these things from time to time-it’s statistically likely to happen.
What are you arguing here? That it happens and it’s not mental illness because there are so many people that it’s bound to happen?
No. That with that many people, there are enough whackos that this sort of thing will constantly be in the news even though when compared to the population size the events are still extraordinarily rare.
Murdering another human is a sign of mental disorder. Especially if it’s in a case like this. I don’t think it’s possible to argue “this human is acting rationally, losing control of yourself to the point where you literally murder someone is, indeed, a sign of mental stability.”
Also, access to guns isn’t the reason people murder each other.
In Christmas Day a 36 year old stabbed 2 children, 2 girls aged 14 and 16, for no other reason than seemingly, they weren’t white. A fucking racist asshole decided to attempt to murder kids. Is this person not suffering from a mental disorder? Should we stop people from owning knives too?
Again, I have never said this was about gun ownership. People who think violent crime stops if guns are gone are delusional. It’s such a rhetorical trap. I bet conservative leadership in the United States love when liberals make this an issue, it’s one of huge issues that motivates their base.
This is now, and always will be, a public health issue. You want less people to be victims of violent crime? Give us universal healthcare that also covers mental illness. Make it free, make education high quality, and free too. Crime will go down, violence will go down.
The political discourse about guns disguises that entire debate. And it’s stupid that people fall for it.
The political discourse about guns disguises that entire debate. And it’s stupid that people fall for it.
Only stupid people say dumb shit like “guns aren’t the problem, the ONLY problem is mental health”. People can expect reform in two separate yet connected topics. One can absolutely impact the other.
Yeah, a crazy fucker stabbed a couple girls. He had a knife. I WISH that the crazy fucker who shot up entire classrooms at Uvalde or Sandy Hook had only had a knife.
Provide better mental health AND tighter gun control policies.
I have never said anything about gun control, for it or against it.
This is a mental health issue. Happy, well adjusted people don’t murder other people.
It’s interesting you mention Sandy Hook. Did you know on the same day in China a mentally ill person ran through a Chinese school and stabbed 22 kids in the fucking head?
Stabbings in Chinese schools are a huge issue. The person killed 8 of the kids by stabbing them in the head.
But sure, keep focusing on guns. Let’s put all of our effort into that. That’s clearly more important than free, publicly funded mental healthcare.
I have never said anything about gun control, for it or against it.
You’re apparently saying that we shouldn’t be focusing on guns because mental health is more important…
But sure, keep focusing on guns. Let’s put all of our effort into that. That’s clearly more important than free, publicly funded mental healthcare.
We can surely do both at the same time, don’t you think?
I really don’t.
The whole topic, in the current political environment, is so polarizing and so toxic, I think it torpedoes any progress that could be made in reducing gun violence.
I believe gun violence will go down if people have better mental healthcare, better access to housing, and better job prospects. My personal belief is people who commit violence against others are doing so because of mental disease. If you reduce their stress, make their future prospects better, and tell them they have a future, their prospects, and mental health, will improve.
America is more polarized now than it ever has been. A conservative and a liberal will never agree on gun control. They just won’t. But I do think a liberal and a conservative can agree that violence is a problem, and that conservatives would be willing to consider solutions to it that aren’t simply making firearms illegal.
It obviously wouldn’t reduce gun violence to 0 like a ban would, but focusing on it as a mental health issue, and addressing that, would reduce other forms of violent crime too. Less muggings, stabbing, rapes, etc. I believe, taken as a whole, there would be less crime and drastically less violent crime, doing that, than any kind of firearm ban could achieve.
Edit: the downvotes prove my point. American politics right now care more about winning whatever hot button issue someone has, rather than cooperating to make meaningful change.
How about everyone reading this does a mental exercise. Let’s say liberals decided not to care about gun control, and that issue wasn’t relevant in American politics for the last 20 years. Do you think the current supreme court would look the way it does? Do you think organizations like the NRA would have anywhere near the funding and power they have now? How many single issue conservative voters did simply not show up to vote if there was 0 chance a liberal majority would “take their guns”
How convenient for you: a kid shoots and kills another kid, and just by default, you can make all sorts of assumptions about their mental health, and use it as a scapegoat, before the topic of firearms can even be brought up.
Please save us all the time and energy and don’t pretend like you actually give a single shit about funding mental health care. A thing conservatives have also gone out of their way to de-fund.
Interesting you’d label a guy advocating for universal healthcare and increased education spending a conservative.
You’re not even listening to my arguments.
If it was the only shooting that day, it would have been a peaceful one for a change. Hint: It wasn’t.
Like I said, I’m not defending guns.
What I hate is people who attack where I live, with sweeping generalizations about how shitty a place it is. It isn’t. The United States is entirely neutral. There are good things about it and bad things about it. Every country has their issues, and reducing violent crimes to such a simplistic focus as “lol, guns bad, USA sucks” is catastrophically stupid.
One of the main ways I judge people is if they punch down. A good example of this is Trump’s feud with Greta Thunberg. At the time he was president of the United States. And she was a 16 year old autistic girl. Think about that. For a time the president of the United States, a person with literal tens of thousands of nuclear weapons at their disposal, decided that a 16 year old, foreign, autistic girl needed the focus of his ire. That’s punching down. And it’s classless.
So if you think the United States is shit, that’s fine. But if you live in a place that you think is so much better than it, you can say that in a way that’s constructive. There’s no need to attack somebody or some thing you think you’re better than
The United States is entirely neutral.
No. Definitely not. When it comes to violent crimes, with guns or otherwise, the US is anything but “neutral”. It is a sore point sticking out of all western countries.
There’s no need to attack somebody or some thing you think you’re better than
Well, it is a fact that shootings are an everyday occurrence in the US. Heck, even mass shootings (plural!) are a normal, everyday occurrence in the US, to the point that mass shootings with less than ten dead people rarely make the news anymore in the US. I’m not attacking you, I’m just stating the facts. But yes, I think any place in the world where things like that are not normal, everyday events is inherently a better place. Try to change my mind on that.
340M.
Entirely too many people base their self worth on what other people think of them.
So “I didn’t get enough shinies” = “nobody really loves me” = “I’m a worthless human being”.
Alternately “I didn’t get enough shinies for my kids” = “I’m a bad parent” = “I’m a worthless human being.”
Then that gets reflected outwards, poorly. :(
Breaking that cycle of seeking approval from other people is one of the hardest things you can do. At our core, we all seek validation on some level or other.
Is it all about how terrible the gf/bf is for not magically getting the super perfectist thing ever?
It’s mostly people running a mental ledger then comparing the value of presents to how much they do in the relationship as a journal for the shortfall in gift value.
Often siblings resenting one another for perceived (or even sometimes objectively clear) favouritism.
The sibling thing I get.
Anyone who does the first one isn’t ready for relationships.
If only there was a good sibling with a gun to stop him…
technically, there was 😐
There was - it made things worse:
“The 15-year-old brother came outside with his own semiautomatic handgun and allegedly shot the younger teen in the stomach”
That’s it no more guns… For minors that is.
Are you suggesting to take away my God given second amendment right?
‘God given’ is the fucking funniest part about this.
The part about it being an amendment is even funnier imo. It didn’t even make the original document.
While God isn’t real, it is a colloquial term for natural or inherent rights. All of the rights acknowledged in the Bill of Rights are considered natural rights.
Unironically yes.
Missing the /s there, too many folks taking you seriously.
Its not god given and yes it should be taken away. Constitutions can be changed or what do you think amendment means?
I’m like 97% sure OP was being sarcastic
Thanks commander data, now go join the borg
Then do it. Get the 75% super majority that you seem believe exists who agree with you that the right to bear arms should be taken away, and amend the constitution.
Whooosh.
Did you know gun control was invented to disarm black activists? You really support Ronald Regan’s RACIST policies??? Figures, bootlicker
lol you’ll need to point at the right part of a holy book and convince us that the Abrahamic god wants you to have guns.
Isia 69:420: lo and the lord said. Carry a strap. And they did.
Above poster was joking I assume
Only whites should have guns as the Mulford Act intended
For minors yes. Unless they take safety classes for at least 3yrs.
Totally reasonable to require children to be at least 3 before they can own a gun. /s
You need to put ‘/s’ at the end of your post so people know you’re being sarcastic.
Three years ago I had to stop my 17 year-old adopted sister from hitting our elderly mother over $30 of missing Amazon crap on Christmas day, then I called the sheriff on she and her baby daddy. Five cars came to mediate the situation.
Needless to say, I don’t go to family Christmases anymore.
Families suck.
Sorry to hear that. That’s awful. If you have your own family in the future, that’s your chance to make sure nothing like that happens in it. We learn from the mistakes we experience.
I honestly feel like we get better with each generation from experiences like this.
I’ve read too many history books to think that things get better with our species over time, and my time is too valuable to me to waste on kids, but that’s just me.
I hope the choices you’ve made are fulfilling for you.
Oh I’m certain our generation is kinder to our kids than those that came before us. History shows us a lot of cruelty to each other over the years but it also shows us a huge improvement over time, particularly in the last 60 odd years.
But thanks I appreciate where you’re coming from and for sure I’m a better dad than my dad was and for sure he was a better dad than his dad was.
Hopefully we’re getting there. :)
Honestly, we peaked in the stone age.
Agriculture was a mistake.
Removed by mod
I learned to be happy on my own, which is the best thing ever if you ask me.
I don’t need other people to live a fulfilling life, and I hope I never feel like I need anyone but myself.
Lol, what? I’d beat the shit out of her if she tried to lay a hand on me mom.
She’d learn real fucking quick about what it really means to beat on someone weaker than you.
It’s a nice thought but I’m pretty sure my beating the shit out of a 17 year-old girl wouldn’t have reflected well on me in front of five sheriff’s deputies.
And Florida’s answer to this, along with so much of the country, is more guns. Absolute insanity
Unclear why second brother being charged with attempted murder but it is presumably because there was a delay between the two shootings.
Revenge kill your own family…hmmmmmmmm
deleted by creator
A daily occurrence in Red States, unfortunately.
I mean, probably true, but misleading? You’re definitely way more likely to get shot in pretty much any major US city, almost all of which are blue.
Not making any value judgement of one vs another. Just saying that this particular issue is pretty ubiquitous. Definitely not just a “red state” thing.
https://www.axios.com/2023/10/16/america-gun-deaths-crime-south
It’s actually both a huge and growing issue in red states specifically. Plus the guns people are using in crimes in states with more restrictive gun laws are coming from the states with less restrictive gun laws.
Basically, the more people who have guns, the more likely those people are to use those guns. Go figure.
Those figures are per capita however. So while there are more gun deaths in California, you are significantly more likely to be killed in New Mexico to gun violence.
Blue cities in red states…gangs in those cities … shocking…
If you read it, you’ll actually notice there’s a specifically different flavor of gun violence in both urban and sub urban areas in states with more restrictive gun laws (generally but not always blue states) and states with less restrictive gun laws (generally but not always red states).
The casual gun violence in red states is also very high, road rage, bars, in addition to areas where the crime is already high, like areas with gang violence. The amount of people dying per capita is higher in red states.
When you add in the gang violence from blue cities…yes it is. Just like NYC carries all the violence of NY state, even thou NY state is pretty damn redneck.
You’re not wrong, just maybe purposefully missing the point? Actually, the majority of gun violence is suicides, have to be careful looking at the data to separate violent crime and suicide. But yeah I would agree with you except almost every other City is experiencing drops in crime and gun violence rates, even New York! Places like Florida have 20% increases in violent crime year over year in their largest cities.
https://time.com/6294021/ron-desantis-crime-florida-data/
You see Orlando catching up with Chicago there, that’s wild! So yeah, a lot of that violent crime is gang activity, but gangs use guns more in “blue cities” in “red states” then their “blue state” counterparts. Data is old though and Florida is currently attempting to go through a data collection sea change to match FBI recommendations.
*Need to note, the pandemic crime levels went absolutely insane everywhere, and just about the entire country saw general crime rate increases in the 30-50% range, this is specifically a discussion of gun violence.
So if the cities are blue in both red states and blue states, but the cities in red states have more gun violence, what could possibly be the difference between the two to account for the increase? Could it be that more lenient gun laws lead to more gun violence?
Nope, poverty, most red states do not take care of their poor. With poverty comes deeper rooted gangs and drug problems. Hell look at some of these dumb states saying they won’t take federal money to feed the impoverished children of their state. Guns aren’t our issue, our shit politicians who don’t want to try and help those at the bottom which create 95% of all the violence. Children growing up without anything but gangs and drugs to call home repeat that cycle. Tossing them in jail just furthers it even more. We need to be helping these people, not pushing them further into poverty. A good start would be single payer healthcare, dumping money into the schools and making sure every child is at least taken care of until they are 18 no matter what their parents are doing. This is a cycle we’re letting continue that can be stopped. We just need our politicians to stop being greedy pieces of shit
muricaaaaaaa!!!111!!
This would never have happened if the sister had had a gun of her own : she would have been able to retaliate, and kill her brother before he could kill her, and we would have gotten a happy ending. I just don’t understand, it seems so simple to me : just issue a gun to every child over the age of 5 (months)! There, done !
