• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police kill armed eighth-grader in Texas school

I'm not saying you're wrong, but these are all interrelated. It's not just about guns or just about parenting or just about access or just about a disturbed child. It's about all of them.

I think I can agree, but to a point. The biggest issue here was that this kid didn't have a safety net. Not only is that parenting 101, but that is just child psychology 101. I have worked with kids. I have taken classes on educational psychology, and I have had friends who have shown symptoms of depression and things like that. You have to have a way to get help to kids like this, and that is the only way to stop these kinds of problems. The best way to stop a problem is to make sure it never exists, and that starts with prevention at home by simple talk. Sad.


PS on an unrelated side note. Your avatar looks like the symbol for Ruger.
 
View attachment 67120729View attachment 67120730View attachment 67120731View attachment 67120732

I have no idea if these look realistic to someone who knows firearms...but these are all "realistic blowback airpistols." Maybe that's the problem. How is anyone, in split second decision-making timeframes, supposed to know the difference?

Only the 3rd. An 8th grader isn't getting his hands on something that expensive and rare. I would question the 1st, but there are a lot out there that can easily be stolen. Far mor ecommon. The other 2 don't like anything special to me other than just a handgun.

I will say that you can't in a split second decision. It makes me question how this situation was approached. I assume the cops rolled out fast and entered the school without any knowledge. I believe that is SOP for active shooter situtations. Police should enter and contain and STOP the threat as quickly as possible. My question is what happened at the end. 3 shots? If 3 shots were fired that means that all parties were probably stationary. And did the police talk to the kid? There are so many questions about course of action, but like you said there is no way to distinguish. They had no choice.

The only answers to be had are WHY did he bring the toy in.
 
Just like Michael Moore. Turning a sad issue that isn't about GUNS into a political platform. The fact is this wasn't a GUN issue. It was the issue of crappy and irresponsible parenting, of poor school management in not paying attention to a child in distress, and 100 other sad issues (and perhaps one of SAFE ownership before it is ever an issue of guns).

I feel horrible for the officers who now have to question themselves for the rest of their lives about this. The fact is that they did have to defend their life, and I cannot fault them for that. It is easy to judge a situation like this from the outside, especially when you cannot access the emotion of the situation when it happens to you as a person.

From what I know the two kids from Columbine had pretty normal upbringings. Same with the vTech killer.

The Psychology Behind School Shootings: Protests Against and Reflections of a System That Fails Us | CORRUPT.org: Conservation & Conservatism

Saari, like Auvinen, was brighter than most of his school mates and thus found himself at odds with his social surrounding. Like many intelligent young people, Saari chose to socially distance himself from mainstream society and instead nurture personal interests. While Auvinen was reading philosophy like Nietzsche, Plato and Linkola, Saari listened to industrial-electronic music and watched horror movies, both of which are cultural areas that are famous for their provocative content and anti-mainstream aesthetic. And like many intelligent students who in one way or another come off as strange or socially awkward, Saari faced the psychology of the mob and learned what it means to be resented by people who hate you because you're smarter than everyone else:

These are two examples of school shooters who don't fit the mold you prescribe of "bad parenting". Furthermore:

While Cho reacted to the American suburban lifestyle of sex, money and alcohol, Pekka-Eric and Matti understood the basic problems underlying the democratic foundation to our Western societies: Smart people are bullied, dumb people rise to power. Stupidity reigns. This is why Pekka-Eric appreciated movies like Idiocracy and philosophers like Nietzsche, describing the psychology behind the mass and its impetus to enact revenge on anyone being successful. Unsurprisingly, Auvinen and Saari were good friends:

You have highly intelligent individuals who are killing for specific reasons that they have worked out through careful observation of their surroundings. Though the attacks are in no way justified, the individuals carrying them out simply can't be brushed off as the products of bad parenting. Supporting this is this:

There are no profiles per se on who a school shooter really is. Most generally are good students, come from all types of races and family situations . Also, school violence doesn’t occur to be a spur of the moment decision. In fact, most have shown explicit planning and detail in laying out their attacks and some have written manifestos and made home movies of their plans. Most in fact, don’t keep their plans secret. They actually hint and talk about it with others, prior to the event. Most shooters know their victims and the idea that they shoot no one they knew, just doesn’t hold true. Most attackers also didn’t threaten anyone prior to the incident and most weren’t loners.

Read more at Suite101: The Profile of a School Shooter: The psychological makeup of individuals involved in school violence | Suite101.com The Profile of a School Shooter: The psychological makeup of individuals involved in school violence | Suite101.com

So what can we surmise from all of this: The first point is that school shooters are outcasts. The second is that they tend to be good/average students. The fact that they range from good to average leads me to conclude that their parents do have some sort of involvement in their lives and the reasons kids resort to violence has nothing to do with "bad parenting" but available means.
 
So what can we surmise from all of this: The first point is that school shooters are outcasts. The second is that they tend to be good/average students. The fact that they range from good to average leads me to conclude that their parents do have some sort of involvement in their lives and the reasons kids resort to violence has nothing to do with "bad parenting" but available means.

Agree with you all the way up to this point. An entire post with valid research that shows why young men commit mass murder, and then you throw all of that out to blame it on the availability of the weapons.
 
Agree with you all the way up to this point. An entire post with valid research that shows why young men commit mass murder, and then you throw all of that out to blame it on the availability of the weapons.

Why not the available means? Guns do what knives can't. They allow for the attack of multiple individuals, they can be fired from a relatively safe distance, etc. Have you ever heard of a school attack be carried out with a knife? Sure they happen but I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that they victim count is MUCH lower. So then what do we have? Guns provide the perfect means to carry out a school shooting and are thus the most readily available and sought out tool of a school shooter.
 
Yes, but the root of the problem is that a certain number of young men grow up wanting to kill everyone they know. For very good reasons. We should work on changing that, instead.
 
If the kid was pointing the air pistol at cops and "engaging" them how did he got shot in the back of the head? I wonder what the kid said to the cops before they shot him. As it says the cops refuse to reveal what the kid said before they shot him.
 
I didnt know this was a ruling?

and this has nothing to do with you im just going to throw a little rant out there

If this is a ruling its stupid because it doesnt really solve much, because whether a gun looks real or not you dont point it at people and especially not a cop. Secondly what happens if this ruling catches on so criminals just start painting or modding their guns to buy time and get the drop on people/cops?

Just saying toy/air/real the answer is proper education of ALL (person with gun and law enforcement)

now literal toy guns can be painted any color I guess but air guns and such no need, just my opinion

Well: my kids have brightly colored water pistols and pellet guns = people KNOW they aren't out there hurting eachother or others and their lives aren't in danger.

I think that's a key difference - the ruling came around years ago because a child had a play gun and was shot because someone thought it was real.

The 'you don't point guns at people' - parental supervision is what keeps this under control and what makes it a taught and learned knowledge: it is NOT natural and children often don't understand this and must be told often. Also: then - it is illogical ot let kids play with 'toy' weapns of any sort if you're really wanting them to not take a gun and point i tat someone.

But this OP situation isn't a case of play gone wrong - the child was NOT playing (so we learned after facts came out)

If the child in th OP had proper parental supervision and involvement it likely wouldn't have happened at all to begin with. . . but even then: maybe it would have - don't know.
 
Last edited:
If the kid was pointing the air pistol at cops and "engaging" them how did he got shot in the back of the head? I wonder what the kid said to the cops before they shot him. As it says the cops refuse to reveal what the kid said before they shot him.

I suspect he twisted and started to fall when the first shot hit him in the chest.
 
This is a tragedy. One kid dead and cops who will probably never be the same. Problem is, this has happened before and it will happen again. We can never get rid of guns. We can never get rid of kids having access to guns. And we can never presume to know when/where something like this will happen. Sure, good parenting and some due vigilance by all concerned parties might stop some of these, but what percent we can't know. This isn't just a failure by the kids parents/school/friends or the makers of the pellet gun; it's called life and sometimes **** happens.
 
Well: my kids have brightly colored water pistols and pellet guns = people KNOW they aren't out there hurting eachother or others and their lives aren't in danger.

I think that's a key difference - the ruling came around years ago because a child had a play gun and was shot because someone thought it was real.

The 'you don't point guns at people' - parental supervision is what keeps this under control and what makes it a taught and learned knowledge: it is NOT natural and children often don't understand this and must be told often. Also: then - it is illogical ot let kids play with 'toy' weapns of any sort if you're really wanting them to not take a gun and point i tat someone.

But this OP situation isn't a case of play gone wrong - the child was NOT playing (so we learned after facts came out)

If the child in th OP had proper parental supervision and involvement it likely wouldn't have happened at all to begin with. . . but even then: maybe it would have - don't know.

The kid was a band geek and his parents had never even seen him with the airsoft pistol before. Sounds to me like he handled some bully picking on him and tried to scare him with an airsoft and some gun-ho cops shot him. I wonder what exact type and model of pellet gun was used.
 
Welcome to the world the gun lobby is promoting.
 
I was in Texas a few years ago and remember stopping at a gas station and parking next to a truck with shotgun shells on the dash board. I'm going to assume there was a shotgun behind the seat. The window was open. I'm sure it isn't that hard for a kid to get a gun if that is permitted.
 
The kid was a band geek and his parents had never even seen him with the airsoft pistol before. Sounds to me like he handled some bully picking on him and tried to scare him with an airsoft and some gun-ho cops shot him. I wonder what exact type and model of pellet gun was used.

I haven't read anything that presents this 'band geek' and 'bullied'

From one story: he entered a classroom: punched a kid in the face - then the weapons engagement began in the hallway when police arrived.

:shrug:

I can't tell: I don't know - not enough solid facts right now. I feel like we're all grasping at straws.

Regardless: It's still sad that it happend at all - every moment that led up to it . . . sadness.
 
Welcome to the world the gun lobby is promoting.

However tragic this istuation is: your view - an these events - won't change teh fact that our Constitution was written to permit us to be able to defend our selves and our country.
 
I could be wrong, but I thought the kid had a rifle. How did he make it all the way to the classroom with a rifle?
 
I could be wrong, but I thought the kid had a rifle. How did he make it all the way to the classroom with a rifle?

Appears to be a normal CO2 airgun, pistol style.

fd5f36a16c105f00030f6a706700681e.jpg
 
Appears to be a normal CO2 airgun, pistol style.

fd5f36a16c105f00030f6a706700681e.jpg

That makes a lot more sense. Stupid cable news got it wrong again when I first heard about this.
 
BROWNSVILLE, Texas - Police shot and killed an armed eighth-grader who "engaged" officers in the main hallway of his middle school on Wednesday, the South Texas school district said.Brownsville school district officials said administrators immediately called police after the student brandished a weapon about 8 a.m., shortly after classes started at Cummings Middle School. When police arrived, the student "engaged" the officers and was shot, district spokeswoman Drue Brown said in an emailed statement.


Police kill armed eighth-grader in Texas school - National News - bellinghamherald.com


As bad as I feel for the family of the boy, I feel tenfold for the cops. This will mess them up I would think.
[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]


Think it would be safe to say that the events that occured at Columbine changed the rules. The responding police had not just each other to protect but the student body as well.

No idea what was going on in the 15 year old's head, but actions have consequences. Compassion is warranted for the kid's parents but it sounds like the cops just did what they are are supposed to do in a situation such as this one.
 
Yes, but the root of the problem is that a certain number of young men grow up wanting to kill everyone they know. For very good reasons. We should work on changing that, instead.
Exactly. In spite of the all to common dismissal of events like this as "senseless violence", there are, in fact, reasons why kids kill people and if we're going to decrease or eliminate such actions, we need to find and understand the causes.
 
Exactly. In spite of the all to common dismissal of events like this as "senseless violence", there are, in fact, reasons why kids kill people and if we're going to decrease or eliminate such actions, we need to find and understand the causes.

Good luck finding the answer. I would almost guarantee that the reason change every time. It is called "senseless violence" for a reason; it doesn't make sense. Even after this kind of violence, no one ever seems to agree on the exact reasoning. Best any of us can do is make sure we teach our kids right.
 
Good luck finding the answer. I would almost guarantee that the reason change every time. It is called "senseless violence" for a reason; it doesn't make sense. Even after this kind of violence, no one ever seems to agree on the exact reasoning. Best any of us can do is make sure we teach our kids right.
Not understanding violence doesn't make the violence itself senseless which is why the label is without merit. Moreover, while a single cause is likely not responsible for all violent actions like the one described in the OP, school shooters tend to share distinct characteristics. Consequently, if we understand the causes of those characteristics among others they might share in addition to any individual circumstances that increase one's chances of committing such violent acts, then those acts may be prevented.

Maybe the best the average person can do is teach their children, but not "any of us". There are certain some of us like psychiatrists, educators and others, who can do much more.
 
The kid was a band geek and his parents had never even seen him with the airsoft pistol before. Sounds to me like he handled some bully picking on him and tried to scare him with an airsoft and some gun-ho cops shot him. I wonder what exact type and model of pellet gun was used.

"Gun-ho" cops? I don't think so. The kid should never had been stupid enough to point the gun at police. The police did no wrong, since they weren't the idiot pointing the gun at them.

Welcome to the world the gun lobby is promoting.

And what exactly do you think the "gun lobby" is promoting? Tell us what world you think they're creating.
 
Exactly. In spite of the all to common dismissal of events like this as "senseless violence", there are, in fact, reasons why kids kill people and if we're going to decrease or eliminate such actions, we need to find and understand the causes.

I believe, if practical, students should be punished more severly for bullying, because obviously it's not being addressed enough.
 
Appears to be a normal CO2 airgun, pistol style.

fd5f36a16c105f00030f6a706700681e.jpg

With this I can't fault the police at all. The gun looks so realistic.
 
Back
Top Bottom