School Shooting at Oxford High School

[Zacha341]

^ Yep. It was always about more than what a 'three-word' moniker [don't say gay] conveyed. Getting back to protecting our schools better, IMO part of the solution lies in better security. And a liaison between state law enforcement and the school districts trained LEO's. DPSCD has this in place with metal detectors and security on staff at during school operation hours:

https://www.detroitk12.org/Page/7058

[southen]

A father arrived at the school and saw a little girl with blood on her clothing,he went to check her for injuries,she had none and said it was from her best friend who was deceased,he asked what her best friends name was and it was his daughter.

He did not know who his daughters best friend was.

People are having kids but wanting to live their lives as if they do not have kids,it’s like their kids live in the same house but they do not have a clue about what they are doing or hanging out with.

Also Richard...

Where are you getting the personal information on the family where you passed that judgment?

You are acting like you personally know them,do you?

This is how social media is used to create discontent by spreading rumors and false narratives.

One paragraph about a grief stricken parent trying to figure out what is happening during a shooting but doesn't know the child he's speaking to? Lousy parent who we can judge.

Mountain of evidence against two parents who are being charged with enabling a shooting? Those are just rumors and an activist prosecutor.

But keep in mind it is everyone else pushing a narrative and agenda, not Richard. He just loves freedom.

[Richard]

Also Richard...



One paragraph about a grief stricken parent trying to figure out what is happening during a shooting but doesn't know the child he's speaking to? Lousy parent who we can judge.

Mountain of evidence against two parents who are being charged with enabling a shooting? Those are just rumors and an activist prosecutor.

But keep in mind it is everyone else pushing a narrative and agenda, not Richard. He just loves freedom.

The news was the actual parent speaking - your local case so far has been about hearsay and a one sided account as presented by the prosecution.

The mountain of evidence

There is no mountain of anything,the prosecution makes public allegations claiming a mountain of evidence,they still have to prove it,it’s not based on that’s all you need to hear in order to pass judgment on guilty or not.

That is what the trial is for,to sift between the facts and separate what you want to believe from those facts.

You are doing exactly what the prosecutor conditioned you to do - repeat the mountain of facts and that is the deciding factor.

People have choices in life,they can be led or they can lead,most like to be led because it is easy,you really do not have to actually think about anything,just keep repeating what you are told until you believe it as fact.

There is a big difference between parents becoming involved with their children and the legalities of what happens when they are not and to what extent are they liable for what their child does while not in their presence.

That is what your local case is about,in this case it is attempting to hold the parents responsible for a school shooting.

It’s actually two different cases.

[southen]

So sayeth the man who says that everything is a vast conspiracy perpetrated against his particularly world view. A true thought leader you are.

[Richard]

Yes out of 5 billion people in the world,Richard has this special little mind that nobody else has,it would appear that your preference would be that everybody should fall into lockstep as directed.

That takes zero thought and creates evilness in the world,Kinda like the policy in the Philippines,walk down the street,you are a drug dealer,guilty,bang instant bullet to the head,no trial,no evidence needed,because I said you are a drug dealer you are,sentenced to immediate death.

Which makes you more upset,that there are people capable of independent thought or we still have the ability to have independent thought.

The latter seems to apply.

Thats as bad as repeating we need to ban assault weapons or these weapons are weapons of war.

Assault weapons are fully automatic and have been banned for the general public use sense 1934.

All you are trying to ban is something that was already banned.

[canuck]

Yes out of 5 billion people in the world,Richard has this special little mind that nobody else has,it would appear that your preference would be that everybody should fall into lockstep as directed.

That takes zero thought and creates evilness in the world,Kinda like the policy in the Philippines,walk down the street,you are a drug dealer,guilty,bang instant bullet to the head,no trial,no evidence needed,because I said you are a drug dealer you are,sentenced to immediate death.

Which makes you more upset,that there are people capable of independent thought or we still have the ability to have independent thought.

The latter seems to apply.

Thats as bad as repeating we need to ban assault weapons or these weapons are weapons of war.

Assault weapons are fully automatic and have been banned for the general public use sense 1934.

All you are trying to ban is something that was already banned.

Tell us why they were banned in 1934. Seems like some of your "moron politicians" [[dixit rocket) fiddled with your constitution, then.

[Rocket]

Tell us why they were banned in 1934. Seems like some of your "moron politicians" [[dixit rocket) fiddled with your constitution, then.

Yes, yes, you're starting to get it.

One of the 50,000 unconstitutional gun laws passed over the years in the USA was the bill in the 1930's banning automatic weapons [machine guns, burst fire etc].

Since relaxed a bit if one goes through the process of obtaining a Class 3 weapons license. But you give up certain other rights when you get such a license. For instance, the ATF has the right to enter your home day or night and inspect those firearms, and you have to state where they are going to be stored. [or something like that, it's been years since the details were listed to me].

[southen]

Yes, yes, you're starting to get it.

One of the 50,000 unconstitutional gun laws passed over the years in the USA was the bill in the 1930's banning automatic weapons [machine guns, burst fire etc].

Since relaxed a bit if one goes through the process of obtaining a Class 3 weapons license. But you give up certain other rights when you get such a license. For instance, the ATF has the right to enter your home day or night and inspect those firearms, and you have to state where they are going to be stored. [or something like that, it's been years since the details were listed to me].

"My spidy senses are tingling that something is off about this event. And just a week before the annual NRA thing?"

[Gistok]

Looks like American's are starting to get a bit nervous about the "perceived" sound of gunfire...

Stampede Ensues After Loud Noise at Barclays Center Incites Fear of Gunman [[msn.com)

[southen]

Looks like American's are starting to get a bit nervous about the "perceived" sound of gunfire...

Stampede Ensues After Loud Noise at Barclays Center Incites Fear of Gunman [[msn.com)

That's just the sound of freedom that the framer's wanted us to enjoy.

[Zacha341]

Speaking of guns and those who respond with them...

'This is why we need the 2nd amendment!' West Virginia mystery woman hailed hero for using legally-owned pistol to kill criminal armed with an AR-15-style rifle at a graduation party...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...man-AR-15.html

[Rocket]

^ Good going woman!

Something like 1.2 million people a year defend themselves with firearms.

The anti-gun crowd never seems to address that, or tell us how many tens of thousands of lives a year they are willing to sacrifice to achieve their dream of tyranny.

The more restrictive the gun laws, the more shooting deaths seem to occur. Chicago has some of the toughest laws, yet regularly sees 20-60 shot in a weekend.

[canuck]

^ Good going woman!

Something like 1.2 million people a year defend themselves with firearms.

The anti-gun crowd never seems to address that, or tell us how many tens of thousands of lives a year they are willing to sacrifice to achieve their dream of tyranny.

The more restrictive the gun laws, the more shooting deaths seem to occur. Chicago has some of the toughest laws, yet regularly sees 20-60 shot in a weekend.

Sure. But once you step outside Cook County, it’s a free for all, and besides, you have no problem getting illegal guns, so the constitutional argument is moot in all its glory.

The 1930’s ban on automatics had to do with the violence in cities like Chicago, didn’t it? So, the violence from street gangs and the
mob were enough to move politicians to do the right thing. Whosoever pushed back on that legislation probably had a nice little gig as hitmen, I don’t think your average Joe and Joanne back then had their sights on buying machine guns. Their quest for the basic human right to shoot cans in their backlots didn’t enter into it.

[Gistok]

^ Good going woman!

Something like 1.2 million people a year defend themselves with firearms.

The anti-gun crowd never seems to address that, or tell us how many tens of thousands of lives a year they are willing to sacrifice to achieve their dream of tyranny.

Let me see if I get this right... People need guns... to protect themselves from people who have guns.

[ABetterDetroit]

States that have stronger firearm safety laws have lower per capita firearm deaths. Poverty + the loads of guns that are being pumped into our society + weak firearm laws = high per capita firearm deaths. Anyone with half a brain who has lived in the Detroit Metro knows this.

Safe storage laws save some children's lives. It is a statistical equation. Unfortunately, to understand something like that one would have to be smart enough to possess analytical thought and actually give a damn about saving some of the children's lives that are lost to gunfire.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/s...ty/firearm.htm

[Rocket]

Let me see if I get this right... People need guns... to protect themselves from people who have guns.

and from people with knives, or screwdrivers, or who are bigger than they, or when it's 2 against 1, or it's a man v.s. a woman, etc, etc.

Women would be the biggest victims if they were no longer allowed to defend themselves against home invaders and rapists and such.

[Gistok]

Yes out of 5 billion people in the world,Richard has this special little mind that nobody else has....

Alright "special little mind" we are at 7.75 billion now... we hit 5 billion 35 years ago in 1987...

[Zacha341]

Yep. Ask most Detroiter's about their firearm rights and rather or not they need affirmation/ approval from the NRA! Or any other boogie-man repubbed lobby. Nope. Not necessary. Personal decisions.

Let me see if I get this right... People need guns... to protect themselves from people who have guns.

Yep. Another reality - clearly understood as more women learn how to use firearms. Especially in high crime areas here in the US.

...Women would be the biggest victims if they were no longer allowed to defend themselves against home invaders and rapists and such.

In both cases one can always choose not to own a firearm, if preferred.

But let us not be oblique in understanding why some do!

[southen]

and from people with knives, or screwdrivers, or who are bigger than they, or when it's 2 against 1, or it's a man v.s. a woman, etc, etc.

Women would be the biggest victims if they were no longer allowed to defend themselves against home invaders and rapists and such.

Hey remember when you belittled the 21 dead in Texas to claim that their deaths were a conspiracy against gun owners? Do you remember deleting that comment because if you revealed how disgusting a person you are people might not listen anymore?

[Richard]

Yep. Ask most Detroiter's about their firearm rights and rather or not they need affirmation/ approval from the NRA! Or any other boogie-man repubbed lobby. Nope. Not necessary. Personal decisions.



Yep. Another reality - clearly understood as more women learn how to use firearms. Especially in high crime areas here in the US.



In both cases one can always choose not to own a firearm, if preferred.

But let us not be oblique in understanding why some do!

Michagan/Detroit is not even listed in the top 5 for gun violence,that could be because they use 50 of the most populated cites as a guide.

When people talk about gun violence and using government statistics,they are not separating guns used in suicides which is over 53% or a 2 to 1 ratio,other countries people jest found other ways,which lowers their gun death stats.

Until recently gun violence death was not actually tracked in this country,it was based on state’s voluntary submitting the information to the FBI.

The country is off the chain with violence,guns are an easy target because people do not want to seem weak to their constituents as they have to walk back policy’s that are creating the rise in violence in the first place.

[Richard]

Alright "special little mind" we are at 7.75 billion now... we hit 5 billion 35 years ago in 1987...

Once you become one in a billion - what does it matter if the number becomes 2-3-8 billion?

Only 2 people actually invented electricity out of a population of hundreds of millions at that time,so 1 in a billion is not really an unrealistic goal.

[canuck]

Once you become one in a billion - what does it matter if the number becomes 2-3-8 billion?

Only 2 people actually invented electricity out of a population of hundreds of millions at that time,so 1 in a billion is not really an unrealistic goal.

Well Dick, you are pretty good at inventing numbers, but that doesn’t make you close to one in a thousand.

Even if your National suicide rates were counted in the general homicides, which I doubt; don’t they reveal the true nature of guns? How can some things heretofore deemed innocuous remain inoffensive in the public eye? A big part of the problem goes back to the Weapon word.


If they had left firearms out of that category, you could probably just stash them in the general junkyard of items like toaster ovens, cars, cellphones [[heard that one before), and jell-o pudding mix. Wonder how many people actually use cars to go out on a rampage, apart from the ones in Trier, Nice, Toronto? Folks are usually doing drive-bys when doing multiple hits, and the object of choice happens to be a weapon; dedicated to killing: otherwise known as a gun.

[Zacha341]

Moving away from the gun debate for a bit: Relative to police response time and potential lives saved, they need to be faster to act [on all school properties - K12 and college campuses]. I was teaching at Henry Ford College [in the actual building!] when a crazed student shot a classmate, then himself - 2009.

Dearborn Police were there lightning fast, but in this case the shooter shot the classmate and himself quickly. But it was not the long time waiting about [outside] to enter and secure the building as we saw in this Texas shooting.

[Zacha341]

That factor does seem to emerge... violence is up applied with varied means.

I recently witnessed a stabbing near WSU campus [broad daylight on Woodward]. I pulled over and called 911. Police arrived quickly along with an ambulance to aid the man bleeding profusely from his hand/ lower arm. Who knows what was on the mind of the [in this case] 'knife' wielding man!

The country is off the chain with violence, guns are an easy target because people do not want to seem weak to their constituents as they have to walk back policies that are creating the rise in violence in the first place.

[Richard]

^ Florida anybody that was carrying could have dropped the knife guy and not been prosecuted.

“Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm — even when they know the harm will occur,” said Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law. “Police can watch someone attack you, refuse to intervene and not violate the Constitution.”
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government has only a duty to protect persons who are “in custody,” he pointed out.

In the cases DeShaney vs. Winnebago and Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, the supreme court has ruled that police agencies are not obligated to provide protection of citizens. In other words, police are well within their rights to pick and choose when to intervene to protect the lives and property of others — even when a threat is apparent.
In both of these court cases, clear and repeated threats were made against the safety of children — but government agencies chose to take no action.
A consideration of these facts does not necessarily lead us to the conclusion that law enforcement agencies are somehow on the hook for every violent act committed by private citizens.

https://mises.org/power-market/polic...irms-yet-again


The only person responsible for your safety - IS YOU