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. “
Wow you’re a moron
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?
-
Ah, so the gun was purchased legally by one of those trustworthy, responsible members of the well-regulated militia. Nothing to see here, then.
“Well regulated militia” didn’t mean the same thing back then.
Well regulated = well armed and equipped.
Militia = general public who could be called up at a moments notice for public defense.See:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/
“The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense.”
So:
“A well armed and equipped public, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Your comment has been reported, but as you had links and appeared to be arguing in good-faith, I decided to leave it. With that said, I completely disagree with your words.
Review Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 15-16.
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Militia was what we now call “National Guard”. Speaking from experience, as a former guardsman as well as vet in 2 other branches. Back when I went to basic, this was well discussed as a given. I’m surprised people think otherwise to this day.
Unfortunately, it’s the Supreme Court who defines such things and, as cited in D.C. vs. Miller above, they very clearly set the definition as noted.
Since that ruling, they have further clarified it in McDonald vs. City of Chicago (necessary because Heller involved Washington D.C., which isn’t a state).
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/742/
Generally when I point out these inconvenient facts the response is “well, who cares what the Supreme Court says! Get the court to reverse it!”
Which, sure, can be done, we saw that with Roe vs. Wade, all it took was 50 years and the appointment of one conservative judge after another.
In theory we could flip the court, Thomas and Alito are the two oldest members of the court and highly conservative, so electing a Democratic President in '24 and again in '28 would virtually assure flipping the court.
Then the problem becomes keeping it, because the next three oldest are Roberts, Sotomayor and Kagan.
Wrong. You’re making shit up.
Oh man, I think I saw a fish swim by. It was definitely not blue or yellow, either!
deleted by creator
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.
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.
So to start with: universal registration and ID/licensing for gun ownership, and strict liability on registered owners for crimes committed by their guns.
I’m in, sounds great.
2nd Amendment. Can’t be done. “Shall not be infringed.”
Add to that the most recent ruling from the Supreme Court:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/597/20-843/
“the government must affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms.”
This is a new twist from the Supremes. Gun laws must prove that they are in keeping with “historical tradition”. So, banning felons from owning guns is allowed, there’s an historical tradition for that.
So if there’s no historical basis, it won’t pass muster at the Supremes.
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.
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!
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
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
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.
Removed by mod
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?
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.
That family reunion is going to awkward AF next year.
What a wonderful family, with a lot of stable geniuses!
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!
The bullet traveled through her left arm and into her chest, popping both of her lungs. She suffered internal bleeding and was unable to breathe
That’s the nice way of saying she drowned in her own blood.
“These young kids — 14, 15 years old — routinely carry firearms and this is what happens when you got young delinquents that carry guns,” Gualtieri said. “They get upset, they don’t know how to handle stuff, and they end up shooting each other.”
Just FYI, this is not limited to children. There’s plenty of adults who have zero idea on how to handle stress without flashing a piece. I’ve seen about six different people use that as a method of indicating I’m getting over in your lane on my way into work pre-pandemic.
I’m pretty gullible and I believe a lot of stuff. So I’m asking this sincerely.
Are you saying that in America people are tapping their widow with a Glock and giving you the stink eye to get into your lane? Like, instead of indicating and then waiting for a safe gap?
America is pretty big, and that isn’t something that happens where I live (Seattle)
But there are parts of this country where a surprisingly large percentage of people are completely fucking insane and peacock with weapons in reckless ways. It also isn’t unusual for children to have guns, even if it isn’t legal.
There’s a high school in rural Colorado that has given up on doing anything about guns in their high school because something like 30% of students are armed on any given day.
I grew up in Tennessee, and students were allowed to store guns in their cars parked in the high school parking lot.
I have met many people who open-carry and then openly emphasize it to others because they want to be intimidating. It’s a part of their identity, and they will let you know in inappropriate ways.
This country is weird. I’m happy to live in a less violent part of it.
Reno 911! did a bit on this topic. Metal detector at school, manned by the sherriffs. They’d let you surrender your piece and keep it until you left. They had a valet wall behind them and like, claim tags and shit.
I apologize for the tiktok link: https://www.tiktok.com/@reno911tvfan/video/7216351539382979886
Bro…what??? CHAZ was literally in Seattle…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Hill_Occupied_Protest
Tn has two areas that have a serious gang problem. From those two areas comes like 85% of its crime. Everyone carries there and it’s not the wild West like you’re trying to make it out to be.
Found the Fox News watcher.
Protip: The CHOP/CHAZ was a 3-week protest that closed a single neighborhood intersection, and ended over 3 years ago. The only people who think that it is an example of how dangerous Seattle is are people who watch right-wing news and have never set foot in Seattle…
Fox News literally reported on it as if it were another country. They referred to it as if it as the “US/CHAZ border”, and overreported about it like it was the story of the century. Spoiler: they just hate progressive cities like Seattle, and were willing to say anything that would arouse their boomer viewership.
It was basically an unauthorized block party created to stimulate an extended 2020 BLM protest.
Yes, there was some violence, but at such a small scale it had zero effect on the city’s already low violent crime rate.
But keep going about how racial justice protests make you feel unsafe…
Lol people died but naaaa it’s cool it was just a small problem.
https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2023/11/08/washington-crime-rate-up-statistics-chart
It might have been a low crime city 30 years ago but it’s not anymore.
Also hilariously funny how you instantly think I’m a right wing repub. Keep thinking that while you argue with someone who is pro-choice, wants single payer, wants the war on drugs to end and qualified immunity repealed and also marched with the protestors during the BLM movement…but sure…keep putting your head in the sand.
One person and that’s because the paramedics refused to enter and save the person.
If you find it frustrating that people think you’re a right winger, consider not talking like one.
Yes because right wingers want all the stuff I’ve just stated…have you wondered why the Republican party still exists? It’s not because the Dems are fantastic… it’s because they won’t leave the damn guns alone. You tear that one last thing from the repubs and it’s a dem win for decades.
The George Floyd protests were outliers and the bigger picture shows that Tennessee is one of the most violent states in the country: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_violent_crime_rate.
Even if you look at homicides per county, violence in TN is pretty widespread: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Granted, Washington state’s homicides look fairly evenly distributed there but the worst areas are outside of Seattle. Also, based on your description of TN I’d expect it to look like Illinois where most homicides occurs in specific areas of Chicago
Memphis and Nashville… that’s where the gangs are and where the majority of the violence is. This isn’t an unknown thing. Both counties that hold those cities are have a high murder rate. This goes for basically all large cities, it shouldn’t be a surprise.
Funny how Seattle is dangerous because of BLM, and Tennessee is dangerous because of Memphis (majority Black city), and “gangs”.
I definitely see a pattern with what you consider dangerous…
O nooo the white privileged white guy is pointing out that only black people are in gangs…the fuck is wrong with you? Can’t refute points…run to the defense of calling someone a racist. Get a grip child.
Lol fucking clown. Never even been to a city have you
Naa never been at all, I’m just some backwoods hick liberal…
https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2023/11/08/washington-crime-rate-up-statistics-chart
Clown…
The fact that you go ad hominem with every comment indicates that you are conservative and completely out of touch.
You clearly don’t know what a conservative is then.
Wow, Seattle’s crime rate grew by 15% between 2019 and 2023? Wow, that’s crazy. As we all know, absolutely nothing significant has happened in the past 4 years, and the crime rate nationwide remained static. /s
Are you going to tell me it’s because of covid? Or do you want to actually understand that more people have moved their and now you have more crime? It’s average for the rest of the USA…
I literally lived in the CHOP. My apartment was where it was founded. Just stop, other than the police abusing people and paramedics allowing people to die, nothing at all happened.
That does seem to be what he is lying about, yes.
I wouldn’t be so sure. I saw someone pull a gun at a fast-food drivethrough because there was a disagreement about whether the dude ordered french fries. And you’re literally responding to an article about a kid killing his sister with a gun over presents. What makes it so unbelievable to you?
I’m not doubting guns have been used in road rage incidents before, I’m doubting he’s seen it 6 times since the pandemic.
And I’m doubting the effectiveness over a blinker because tbh I’m not making eye contact with other drivers at 75mph, I’m a little busy, so I won’t even see the gun like I would “the flashing light called a turn signal.”
They said pre pandemic not post
Fair, I assumed he meant since then, but it looks like he hasn’t seen anyone do that since the pandemic maybe? Are we just referring to all of recorded history before 2019 as “pre-pandemic” now?
In any case I don’t believe this dude has seen it happen six times in his life or any of his past lives, flat out.
🙄
He wasn’t saying it was effective. And typically on freeways and interstates, the speed differential between cars, which are also all moving in the same direction, makes it much easier to make eye contact and see individuals in their cars.
The lack of a large speed differential is also one of the reasons assisted driving systems are most effective on interstates, freeways, and highways.
He wasn’t saying it was effective.
He indicated their success by neglecting to use the word “try.”
And typically on freeways and interstates, the speed differential between cars, which are also all moving in the same direction, makes it much easier to make eye contact and see individuals in their cars.
Keep your eyes on the road man, you’re going to get in an accident.
The lack of a large speed differential is also one of the reasons assisted driving systems are most effective on interstates, freeways, and highways.
Do they brake for armed motorists?
I sense you get this a lot in your life, but: 🙄
I think it is generally unlikely but am also sure that there are places where this is part of the culture.
In Florida you’re allowed to use lethal force if you justifiably believe that your safety is threatened. When lockdown first started, there was a video of a dude having a meltdown at a Costco because he had to wear a mask. The person at the door was a woman of 65-70 and the man child pumped up his chest and yelled “I feel threatened” at her, which I learned in Florida for threatening to murder someone over an inconvenience.
Jesus. Where the fuck do you live that people do that?
Good God what city do you live in?
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.
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.
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.
Republicans: “No! In fact, we’ll make sure that it’s legal for minors to carry weapons without any adult supervision!!!”
Fools…
Are you suggesting to take away my God given second amendment right?
‘God given’ is the fucking funniest part about this.
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.
The part about it being an amendment is even funnier imo. It didn’t even make the original document.
Missing the /s there, too many folks taking you seriously.
Unironically yes.
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.
Removed by mod
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.
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
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.
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.
I hope you have the opportunity to build a family (via biology or social bond) that better lives up.
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.
Strict liability for whoever was the legal owner of the gun(s), I say.
Whoever let these children get their hands on the firearm is absolutely a murderer. Even if it someone who let their gun get stolen from their car. Definitely if it was a family member or friend.
Oh, I remember that event with an actor killing a camera operator with a prop gun (jokingly pointing it at her) or something.
The person responsible for props was a complete dumb baboon and guilty of murder, yes.
However, I was shocked by the fact that so many people think that pointing a real gun, even if it’s a prop, at somebody without checking that it’s not loaded is normal and thus that actor was innocent. They were defending that action as if they themselves would really have taken a gun and squeezed the trigger while pointing at someone without checking.
So maybe it’s about responsibility and education, not ownership of guns.
Because, say, Moldova (off the top of my mind), hardly a rich country or even with a healthy society, has gun laws more liberal than in USA, and doesn’t have school shootings and such events.
Switzerland and Austria have very liberal gun laws, again possibly more so than in USA, and don’t have such a problem.
Can’t speak for Moldova or Austria, but I would not call Switzerland’s gun laws liberal.
They are VERY strict. Gun ownership rates are high, but there are tons of restrictions and licensing requirements on ownership and sale of guns there. The country is proof that having a strong regulatory structure does not necessarily prevent gun ownership and should absolutely be considered a model for where the US regulator environment should be moving (universal registration including 2nd hand sales, full license checks for all purchases including ammo, effective bans on large categories of weapons, mandatory training, and the like).
People who love “gun rights” always cite Switzerland without even doing the most basic Wikipedia-level research on it.
People who love “gun rights” always cite Switzerland without even doing the most basic Wikipedia-level research on it.
People winning arguments in their heads shouldn’t come to real ones.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t those places where you’re required to take some kind of classes to be able to qualify to own a gun? Isn’t it also pretty easy for anyone from the police to be able to take them from you within reason if they find you to be violating some laws?
Yeah. If “taking some kind of classes” is not obligatory in the US, then we have the main reason for all the accidental shootings and kids takings their parents’ guns right here.
and Austria have very liberal gun laws, again possibly more so than in USA,
Austria has relatively relaxed gun laws for Europe. but it’s still fairly strict compared to the USA.
Oh, OK, OK. I’ve literally had something in my memory and did only quick reading on laws in those 2 countries before writing that comment, and evaluated strictness on my own.
You can’t put the responsibility on the actor who never chose to own a gun, so they have no reason to educate themselves about gun safety.
All responsibility lies with their employer (I guess that’s the producer and/or director), who made them handle a gun as part of their job and should have given them the required training, as well as the prop guy whose job it was to check the gun.on the actor who never chose to own a gun, so they have no reason to educate themselves about gun safety.
He chose to take it, point it at a person and squeeze the trigger, so yes he had that reason and yes I can.
Jokingly, I should add, he wasn’t instructed by anyone to take that gun and wave it around.
The only people not having a reason to educate themselves about gun safety are people who don’t touch guns.
All responsibility lies with their employer (I guess that’s the producer and/or director), who made them handle a gun as part of their job and should have given them the required training,
Yeah, they probably managed to make only the prop guy responsible too, just like that actor. But I don’t remember the details.
as well as the prop guy whose job it was to check the gun.
… and about that person I’ve already said what I wanted.
America is hell.
A lot of third world countries are.
And Florida’s answer to this, along with so much of the country, is more guns. Absolute insanity
Well, those kids had already been born, so IDGAF. Vote Republican!
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
