• 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!

Father says son who took gun to school 'made a bad mistake'

That dumbass remark was the comment that got the reaction. I specifically pointed that out. Funny how you left that out when you acted butthurt. Hypocrisy knows no bounds with you it appears.

The salient point was, whether it is a trigger lock, a safe or some other method of securing that gun, it didn't happen. To suggest that a trigger lock is useless is typical NRA nonsense.

You’re still putting words in my mouth to further your personal bias. I didn’t say at any point that a trigger lock was not a good way to secure a firearm (I own and use trigger locks, btw) As a simple aside to my main point I only pointed out that a trigger lock effectively defeats the purpose of a defensive weapon. It was an afterthought, if you will, to Thunder’s assertion that guns should have trigger locks. The main point was the criminal history of the boy’s mother. Why is this so upsetting to you?

I did, and you clearly have no idea what hoplophobia means.

Oh, please, educate me then. Let’s hear your spin. This ought to be entertaining.
 
The boy belongs in a state mental facility until the age of 18. 9 years old or not, you don't bring guns to school. Why is the mother being blame? Did she give her son the gun and told him to take it to school?

Also if the little girl who got shot and her parents are illegal, they deserve no civil suites because she'd still be alive and well if they didn't sneak into the our country. It's bad enough that tax payers are footing the hospital bills.

no he does not, period. that will ruin him.
 
Priceless.

I know, right?

trigger locks are simple common sense. they prevent kids or thieves from using your gun.

You realize that you can remove a trigger lock with a good hammer, right? Do thieves not have opposable thumbs in your world?
 
Hoplophobia= fear of firearms, fear of weapons.

and clearly I, am no hoplophobe.

So, your argument is that since you’re only afraid of handguns, you don’t actually have a fear of weapons? That makes sense and we're on the same page now, because I’m only afraid of Black Widows, but I’m not afraid of spiders…
 
I don't recall anyone suggesting he's harmless.
Nobody said it, but there are several posts that readily state the kid just made a mistake and that he should just go home and only the mother should be charged. The implication of all those posts is that the kid is harmless - why else would people say he just made a mistake and shouldn't be in jail? If such posters didn't think the kid was harmless, then they would want him to stay in jail and they wouldn't say he just made a mistake.

Although most indications suggest he may well be.
Nobody knows why he brought the gun and what he intended to do with it. So it looks like most indications point to "we have no idea if he's harmless".

Are you suggesting the Mother shouldn't be held responsible for leaving a loaded gun where a child could get ahold of it? Really?
Nope.

We don't know that. But we also don't know if he was just taking it with him because he planned to run away. Seriously, the crimes of other children, especially murder do happen, but they are exceedingly rare.
My point is that we don't know and since we don't know, it makes zero sense to come to some of the conclusions being made in the thread.

So throw him in jail until he turns 18. That will fix him. argh.
I never said that. In fact, I didn't make any conclusions about what should happen. I said, "I have a lot of questions concerning the kid," which I think is the smartest thing to say when we have hardly any information. It's a lot smarter than saying, "just send the kid home, he made a mistake", when no one has any idea what his intentions were.
 
So, your argument is that since you’re only afraid of handguns…

I am not AFRAID...of handguns.

I have many weapons at home, and am scheduled to go skeet shooting in a few weeks along with going to a rifle range sometime this spring.

now....back to the topic? or do you wanna focus on me.
 
Nobody said it, but there are several posts that readily state the kid just made a mistake and that he should just go home and only the mother should be charged. The implication of all those posts is that the kid is harmless - why else would people say he just made a mistake and shouldn't be in jail? If such posters didn't think the kid was harmless, then they would want him to stay in jail and they wouldn't say he just made a mistake.


Nobody knows why he brought the gun and what he intended to do with it. So it looks like most indications point to "we have no idea if he's harmless".


Nope.


My point is that we don't know and since we don't know, it makes zero sense to come to some of the conclusions being made in the thread.


I never said that. In fact, I didn't make any conclusions about what should happen. I said, "I have a lot of questions concerning the kid," which I think is the smartest thing to say when we have hardly any information. It's a lot smarter than saying, "just send the kid home, he made a mistake", when no one has any idea what his intentions were.

what we do know is that the gun went off while in his backpack, right? seems to me that a nine year old should be given the benefit of the doubt here.
 
Even back at the age of 9 or younger, I knew it would be wrong and INSANE to bring a gun to school. Whether he meant to for show and tell or to shoot someone is irrelevant. He blengs in a mental institute till the age of 18. When he's 18, he's entitled to a review.

With the best will in the world, you didn't. You couldn't, since impulse control is not gained until well into the teens. The age of criminal responsibility in Scotland is early, and that's set at twelve. Children under that age cannot be held criminally liable.
 
Aren't politics based on real life situations? Why would a real-life situation not spark political comments...on a political debate site? I'll never understand people who think that tragic situations ought to be immune to political commentary. Many political positions stem from knowledge of such situations.

Sorry man...dancing in the blood of a wounded child to further your politic agenda is chicken ****. You suggest a trigger lock law is going to make a difference to a mother that has a demonstrated lifetime history of not giving a damn about laws. Sorry...that's just using a wounded child (man...imagine the mileage this could have got if she died? Damn the bad luck) to push an agenda. Thats pathetic.
 
Sorry man...dancing in the blood of a wounded child to further your politic agenda is chicken ****. You suggest a trigger lock law is going to make a difference to a mother that has a demonstrated lifetime history of not giving a damn about laws...

its not about following the law.

its about protecting your children.
 
Sorry man...dancing in the blood of a wounded child to further your politic agenda is chicken ****. You suggest a trigger lock law is going to make a difference to a mother that has a demonstrated lifetime history of not giving a damn about laws. Sorry...that's just using a wounded child (man...imagine the mileage this could have got if she died? Damn the bad luck) to push an agenda. Thats pathetic.
Nope, not pathetic. Where do you think people's political opinion's come from? They come from real-life situations. It makes absolutely zero sense to argue that people shouldn't use real life situations like this as evidence to support their political points, especially on a political debate site. Moreover, if people look at situations like this and think certain laws can prevent them, then by all means they should make their points. If you disagree, make yours. I actually think your argument is just a pathetic tactic to shout down people you disagree with.
 
Last edited:
You’re still putting words in my mouth to further your personal bias. I didn’t say at any point that a trigger lock was not a good way to secure a firearm (I own and use trigger locks, btw) As a simple aside to my main point I only pointed out that a trigger lock effectively defeats the purpose of a defensive weapon. It was an afterthought, if you will, to Thunder’s assertion that guns should have trigger locks. The main point was the criminal history of the boy’s mother. Why is this so upsetting to you?

It's not. I called your comment a dumbass remark. I stand by it. Why does that upset you so much?
 
its not about following the law.

its about protecting your children.

My children are better protected when my gun is ready to defend them. ;) Criminals do criminal things. More legislation is not going to change that, and a trigger lock is really just a feel-good measure that is no substitute for parents who set good examples for their children by following the law to the best of their ability and teaching their children proper safety around things like firearms, automobiles, power tools and household cleaners. :)
 
what we do know is that the gun went off while in his backpack, right? seems to me that a nine year old should be given the benefit of the doubt here.
Why should he be given the benefit of the doubt? He brought the gun to school. That's not a normal thing to do. If he were at home and it accidentally when off when he was playing with it, sure, but not when he made a decision to take it out of his home and bring it around other people.

In the end, we know nothing about his intentions. He either intended to harm people or he didn't. I'd rather get all the information before drawing conclusions. That always seems to be the smart thing to do.
 
You'll notice that's not a normal orange shirt he's wearing. It's inmate clothing. Unreal.

Why's that unreal? It's worn for a reason -all juvenile offenders wear it no matter what they've done.

If the boy is found guilty of the charges, he could be ordered to spend up to 30 days in juvenile detention and 12 months on the juvenile version of probation and to perform 150 hours of community service.

Doesn't sound like it's going to be too harsh considering he could have killed the little girl.

I think it's suitable and will have him rethink his entire life and how he handles things.

This has also established that his mother is a piece of **** and once she's no longer in his life she won't continue to taint him with her bull****.
 
Top Cat said:
Father says son who took gun to school 'made a bad mistake'[/url]

thankscaptain128622705383918066.jpg


Yes taking a gun to school is a bad idea. At least he should have turned the safety on.
 
its not about following the law.

its about protecting your children.

Good lord you CAN'T be as dense as you present yourself. It's just not possible. Laws are meaningless to those who will not follow them.
 
Good lord you CAN'T be as dense as you present yourself. It's just not possible. Laws are meaningless to those who will not follow them.

Yes - obviously the mothe rdoesn't have a single braincell left in her head after all that meth she's done.

I'd be surprised if it was a legal firearm at all.
 
My children are better protected when my gun is ready to defend them. ;)...

all the emoticons in the world don't wipe a mothers' tears away when her kid accidentally shoots his little sister in the face, cause the gun on the couch had no trigger lock.
 
With the best will in the world, you didn't. You couldn't, since impulse control is not gained until well into the teens. .

This is not a simple case of intentionally throwing a rock through someone's house window because of an impulse control problem. The kid a brought a gun to school. He belongs in a mental institution until he's adult because only insane people would bring a gun to scholl until the age of 9.
 
no he does not, period. that will ruin him.

Yes he does belong there period. This is not a normal little boy we're talking about ruining. This is a pscho.
 
View attachment 67122928

View attachment 67122927

Local News | Father says son who took gun to school 'made a bad mistake' | Seattle Times Newspaper

I'm the first one here to suggest that there be tighter controls on firearms. This whole thing is sickening. And obviously the Mother will get sued at the very least in a civil suit. But I am at a total loss to understand how prosecuting this 9 year old boy, AND keeping him from his custodial parent is a good idea in the wake of this tragic accident.

Putting a 9 year old boy in jail accomplishes what here?

This is not a case for gun control at all. You don't punish the rest of us because of what some jackass did.... Or maybe you do. Some people drive recklessly, and cause accidents. That's it!! BAN ALL CARS NOW!!
 
Yes - obviously the mothe rdoesn't have a single braincell left in her head after all that meth she's done.

I'd be surprised if it was a legal firearm at all.

It wasn't. It's illegal for a felon to own a firearm.

all the emoticons in the world don't wipe a mothers' tears away when her kid accidentally shoots his little sister in the face, cause the gun on the couch had no trigger lock.

Do you have an actual point here or was this just a hypothetical attempt at eliciting an emotional response?
 
Back
Top Bottom