About the 11y/o and stick figure threats

[MyrnaLoy]

Source thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x385657

from today's headlines:

Colorado law enforcement officials announced Wednesday that a 12-year-old Burlington boy has been taken in custody in connection with the deaths of his parents and the critical wounding of two siblings. at least three people in his house had been shot, according to police. http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/03/02/colorado.boy.slayings/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

So many recent threads about situations like this, from stick figures with guns to doctors asking about the safe placement of weapons in the household. We can't allow the NRA to toss safety out the window.

[TheWraith]

1. The NRA is the leading teacher of firearms safety on the planet Earth.

Bogeyman fail.

And despite the perception created by media exposure, such incidents are, in fact, incredibly rare.

[MyrnaLoy]

2. I would say

parents are actually the leading teachers of firearm safety. The good thing about parents teaching safety is that they don't usually lobby congress with stupid roadblocks to actual safety.

On edit, are you saying gun violence in the home is extremely rare?

[TheWraith]

3. What "roadblocks," exactly?

In any event, the NRA sponsors more training courses--for kids, adults, and everyone--than any other organization.

[MyrnaLoy]

5. do you feel

as you stated above that more people are taught gun safety by parents of the NRA? That was your position wasn't it? Now, before the fabulous NRA were guns incredibly unsafe in the home? Were pioneer kids shooting themselves left and right?

[petronius]

12. You started this thread using a kid who (apparently) shot his parents in the home to bash

the NRA as anti-safety, and 5 posts later you're turning around and bashing the NRA as not being as safety-oriented as parents in the home? Truly, you have a dizzying intellect...

[MyrnaLoy]

14. is anything

I've said wrong? Please correct it. Really, dizzying? Would trigger locks have stopped this? The NRA opposed them.

[petronius]

16. What is it that you think you're saying?

You seem to be bouncing around like a jack-in-the-box...

But, in case my point wasn't clear, you appeared to start this thread in order to use the deaths of two parents to bash the NRA for undermining safety.

Then, you turned around and bashed the NRA for not being as safety-minded as parents, apparently forgetting that the victims you're using as tokens were in fact parents.

All of that despite the fact the NRA has a very effective safety-training program, which if anything might have helped the victims you're capitalizing on.

Surely you can see how twisty your line of thinking appears to be, to those of us not blessed with your somewhat flexible perspective...

[MyrnaLoy]

18. do you

want to fight or discuss safety and the use of trigger guards? You're the only one missing the point. Have you found anything I've said factually incorrect yet?

[petronius]

35. Make a point first, and we'll discuss it. So far, it's all assumptions, opinion

masquerading as fact, and unsupported conclusions. At least one other poster has tried to discuss trigger guards with you, but you've glided right past that. So until you decide to stop spinning around and around, and tossing out random events to rail about the NRA, any safety discussion would be one-sided...

[ThatPoetGuy]

27. Wow!

You have the most accurate sigline I've ever seen!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

19. What you have said is mostly hyperbole and conjecture

There is no information where the gun came from, if it had one, or if the child removed it (clue: it is not that hard to do).

You are also not considering the larger issues with trigger locks nor acknowledging that no one, not even the NRA, wants guns in the wrong hands, and that includes underage and felons.

[MyrnaLoy]

20. this isn't hard

especially for a professor. Would trigger guards have prevented a child from shooting his parents in the home where he found the gun and does the NRA oppose their use? I don't think I can simplify the question anymore.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

21. Insufficent information in the instant example

In the macro case, they are not a viable solution due to their associated problems.

Simple enough for you?

[MyrnaLoy]

23. Simple

isn't the word I would use but that's your choice.

[MyrnaLoy]

8. well

did they support mandatory trigger locks? That's one, as you know there are so many more. Basically they are against them http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Faq/?s=20

http://www.gunguys.com/?p=658

[Callisto32]

45. That is because putting shit you have to fumble with in/around a trigger guard is a horrible idea.

[ClassWarrior]

4. +1

NGU.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. They are the leading source of quality firearms safety material and training courses

They also certify instructors and most competitions.

What "actual safety" measures has the NRA attempted to block? Furthermore are those proposed measures actually effective or just feel good sops to the anti rights organization.

[MyrnaLoy]

7. if my memory is correct

I seen to recall they fight/fought mandatory trigger locks. http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=13545

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. Your memory is correct, but have you considered why they opposed them in MA?

[MyrnaLoy]

10. you asked me

what safety thing they were against and I answered, now you want me to think for them? How many times are you going to move the goal post?

What the NRA says:

when asked, the National Rifle Association reported, "Somebody with a concealed-carry license is eight times less likely to be arrested for a violent crime than the general population of Texas age 21 or older."

Reality:

Between January 1996 and this April, concealed-handgun permit holders were arrested on 3,370 charges, the group said. That figure includes 23 arrests for murder or attempted murder; 527 assault arrests; 227 drug-related offenses; and 207 theft, burglary, larcency or robbery arrests.

The group said its examination of Texas Department of Public Safety data found that concealed-handgun holders were charged with weapon-related offenses at a rate 66 percent higher than the general population, with 873 weapon-related arrests during the period surveyed.

There have been 3,370 arrests of concealed-handgun license holders in Texas since 1996, when the law took effect, and this April, according to the Violence Policy Center. The Texas Department of Public Safety estimates that 29 percent of the charges, felony and misdemeanor, resulted in convictions; 26 percent were dismissed, and 39 percent have to be resolved.
A breakdown of the charges:
873 arrests for weapon-related offenses
814 auto-related arrests, including 752 on suspicion of driving
while intoxicated
527 assault arrests
227 drug-related offenses
207 arrests for robbery, burglary, theft or larceny
100 sexual misconduct offenses
70 fraud or forgery arrests
60 rape or sexual assault arrests
23 arrests for murder or attempted murder
As of July, the Department of Public Safety reported 212,969 Texans had permits to legally carry concealed handguns.
SOURCES: Violence Policy Center; Texas Department of Public Safety

That is the reality, what the NRA says is fantasy.

For more read:
Self Control: Not Gun Control by J. Neil Schulman, J. N

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. I was asking you if you knew why they oppose them...since you don't this may help educate you

http://www.nraila.org/issues/factsheets/read.aspx?id=47

What it boils down to is that trigger locks make loaded handguns more dangerous. They intentionally compromise the safety of the trigger guard and increase the likelihood of an unintentional discharge. Trigger locks also render a gun useless for self defense. Since you like to search their site, check out the NRA-ILA produced video showing how trigger locks are dangerous.

Everybody needs to appropriately secure firearms. Trigger locks are often not the right approach for self defense weapons. Had my wife's pistol had one, I would be dead.

[MyrnaLoy]

13. Once again

I answered your question, they opposed a recommendation that would prevent children from shooting themselves in the home.

A gun instructor accidentally shot a student in the foot Saturday during an NRA class to receive certification to carry a concealed weapon, Orlando police said. http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27800

"To be absolutely clear, the NRA believes it is both constitutional and appropriate to disarm convicted felons,” NRA Director of Federal Affairs Chuck Cunningham wrote in a letter of support for the bill. “However, we also believe that no person should lose the right to arms due to convictions for minor, non-violent crimes, especially those that occurred many years in the past.”
http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/ammunition/2009/05/second-amendment-restoration-act-re-introduced

NRA Board member loses his Gun Store http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-185359.html

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. Their opposition is reasoned and may in fact protect more children than it harms

I tend to agree from the perspective that an trigger lock prevents timely self defense by the parents. Had my wife's handgun had one on it, I would be dead.

I heard about the accidental shooting at the class. Not relevant to this discussion, but it is a very rare occurrence. As an instructor, I am very interested to know how it happened.

Given some of the not violent misdemeanors being used by the anti rights zealots in government postions, the NRA has a point. The example I have seen quoted is that in some jurisdictions a conviction for not having your dog on a leash could be used 30 years later to deny gun ownership. That is what happens when you let zealots control your rights

[MyrnaLoy]

17. So if I read it correctly

this family would still be dead if the gun had a trigger lock? How is that possible? My position is that zealots, the NRA, are controlling yours. You did see the book link I posted correct?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. You are reading in things that are not there

No way to know today if the firearm was properly secured with or without a trigger lock since we do not know where it was obtained from and there is a gag order on the case. However, it is well documented that macro level, trigger locks are more of a safety risk than a solution.

[ManiacJoe]

33. You are not reading it correctly.

Of all the cheap and easy-to-use devises for securing a gun, trigger locks are the one that are not recommended. See post 11 for why.

Might trigger locks have worked in this case? Sure, it is possible. It is just that there are less-risky options out there.

[PavePusher]

34. Short answer: trigger locks are cosmetic, and nearly useless.

run "trigger lock" in a youtube search:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjrG5eJCiYY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSS15g5qb44

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyNDLHYJF_g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ad6W1Lef9To

More through google.


In short, unless the child is too young to use tools, they aren't much good, and in fact can present a danger if they are used to lock a gun kept loaded for self-defense. The NRA has no bearing on mechanical devices and the laws of physics.

[MyrnaLoy]

24. Your words about nonviolent felons

"Given some of the not violent misdemeanors being used by the anti rights zealots in government postions, the NRA has a point."

From today's headlines: "The suspect had an arrest record for petty larceny, but none for any violent crimes, the police said." The outcome from that story: "A heavily armed man who crashed his pickup truck on Long Island, then shot an emergency medical technician who went to the accident scene before being killed by the police, appeared to be on his way to carry out a mass killing, the police said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/nyregion/03gunman.html

So to reexamine how the NRA has fought safety; against trigger locks and they want to give non-violent felons the right to have firearms. The result, children kill in the home or hurt themselves and non-violent felons can kill.

[GreenStormCloud]

25. You took 15 years of combined arrests to reach that number.

You dishonestly leave out how those number break down for an annual rate and you dishonestly refuse to compare them to the rate for the general population. Here is a chart of the CONVICTION rate of CHL holders to the conviction rate of the general population. As you can see we are far safer than the general population, despite you attempt to paint us as evil.

[MyrnaLoy]

26. You

may want to contact the Texas Dept of Public Safety because they came up with the numbers, not me.

[GreenStormCloud]

28. But you used them in a dishonest fashion.

You refuse to compare our CONVICTION rate to that of the general population. I keep the TX DPS page bookmarked to use it against anti-gunners. You may wish to notice the chart I posted in this thread.

[MyrnaLoy]

29. by dishonset

do you mean you don't like the numbers? Are they real numbers? Are they made up?

[GreenStormCloud]

32. By dishonest you ignored comparison to the general population.

And you ignored the annual rate. You are trying to make CHL holders look like a bunch of criminals and high-risk people. I take it that you don't like the annual rates, see chart in post #25. We had only 25 convictions out of 100,000 holders.

[Euromutt]

47. They're used to present a distorted picture

And you can always rely on the VPC to provide an object lesson in "How to lie with statistics."

For starters, an arrest doesn't necessarily result in a conviction. Any number of the arrests for murder and assault may ultimately have been ruled to be justifiable cases of self-defense.

Second, as GreenStormCloud points out, there are almost no comparisons made between CHL holders and the general population, so you can't even tell whether Texan CHL holders are more likely to be arrested than Texans in general. In fact, the only comparison made is this one:

The group <i.e. the VPC> said its examination of Texas Department of Public Safety data found that concealed-handgun holders were charged with weapon-related offenses at a rate 66 percent higher than the general population, with 873 weapon-related arrests during the period surveyed.

The bulk of these arrests occurred shortly after the laws had been changed, while many law enforcement officers were not familiar with the new laws. As a result, few (if any) of these arrests resulted in convictions, a fact the VPC conveniently neglects to mention. Which makes it all the more suspicious that this is the only comparison the VPC bothers to mention, the most likely explanation being that it was the only category of arrests in which CHL holders compared unfavorably with non-CHL holders.

So because there aren't any other comparisons, the listing of arrest data doesn't actually prove the NRA's assertion that "somebody with a concealed-carry license is eight times less likely to be arrested for a violent crime than the general population of Texas age 21 or older" to be untrue. That's certainly the impression the VPC wants you to get, but they don't actually deliver evidence to that effect, and the most likely reason they don't is because they can't.

[Atypical Liberal]

37. Indeed

Here is the data, directly from Texas:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=374332

The rate of conviction for just about any crime for CCW permit holders for the last decade has been about one quarter of one percent.

[Callisto32]

43. You mean like support NICS checks?

Teaching basic firearms safety to thousands of people in affordable classes?

Eddie Eagle?

Yeah, roadblocks to safety... The NRA has always been involved in pushing for safety in ways that actually work.

Roadblocks to bullshit like "smart guns" and microstamping, absolutely. But that isn't for safety, it is for the illusion of safety, like the TSA backscatter machines. Bullshit "safety" measures that do nothing but put more unneeded restrictions upon people SHOULD be fought.

[friendly_iconoclast]

46. Some prefer an neat and easy illusion to messy reality.

And you're right:

Bullshit security theater should be ridiculed whenever encountered, whether it involves guns, airports, or what have you.

[Union Scribe]

30. What is the point of the OP?

That we SHOULD arrest kids who draw guns because kids have sometimes used guns? And what's all that shit at the end about the NRA, what does that have to do with anything?

[lawodevolution]

31. The NRAs Eddie eagle program for teaching kids what to do when they find a gun

Is opposed by the Brady campaign and other gun control groups when they try to make it mandatory in school.

Do you (OP) know why?

[Glassunion]

36. Your conclusion does not follow...

NRA bashing aside...

Your comparing an 11 y/o boy who was arrested for drawing a picture to a different child of about the same age who was arrested for murder.

Your trying to compare a zero tolerance policy to a criminal act. They are two completely different situations. The 11 y/o was instructed by his therapist to draw pictures when he became upset. So he did. And he was arrested for it. The OP that I started was on my thoughts on zero tolerance polices. Or as I like to refer to them "zero thought".

Sure you may feel that children may go from drawing pictures to committing crimes, but ask yourself in all honesty. Should children be arrested for thought crime? Should we drag an 11 y/o from his home in handcuffs, because he drew a picture?

Show of hands... How many here have drawn a picture when you were a child that may have been considered a threat, yet you seemed to grow up a well adjusted normal functioning member of society? *my hand is up*

Here is what zero tolerance gets us...
7 y/o gets arrested for shooting a Nerf Toy. http://scaredmonkeys.com/2011/02/04/7-year-old-boy-arrested-for-shooting-nerf-style-toy-gun-to-hammonton-nj-school/
13 y/o gets suspended / charged with terroristic threats for pointing her finger and going "pew, pew". http://jonathanturley.org/2010/04/21/terror-tots-girl-suspended-for-terroristic-threat-in-pointing-finger-at-teacher-and-saying-pew-pew/
9-year-old student was suspended for giving a friend a Certs breath mint. http://jonathanturley.org/2009/04/21/lockdown-high-zero-tolerance-policies-and-authoritarian-learning/
13 y/o strip searched for prescription ibuprofen. http://jonathanturley.org/2009/04/21/lockdown-high-zero-tolerance-policies-and-authoritarian-learning/
14 y/o expelled and criminally charged for spit balls. http://jonathanturley.org/2011/02/02/high-school-student-is-expelled-and-criminally-charged-for-spitballing/
7 y/o suspended for pointing his finger at the wall saying "bang"(at leat he did not use the illegal silencer like the girl that went "pew pew". http://jonathanturley.org/2011/01/24/school-suspends-7-year-old-boy-for-shooting-a-wall-with-make-believe-finger-gun/
10 y/o with Toy Gun Arrested. http://www.11alive.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=124359&catid=40&GID=juD5/d++YtmiZjwqGKDay6Tw1TGed4c0A5QCiVJAOvA%3D
12 y/o arrested for drawing on her desk. http://blog.imperfectparent.com/2010/02/18/12-year-old-girl-arrested-for-drawing-on-desk/
It goes on and on...

What your advocating is pre-crime. Basically that it's ok to arrest children for what they might do. Not what they do. Sure it is the easy answer, just arrest/suspend/expel the little shit, then they become the problem of the state. Instead of trying to insure they(the children) are ok, or don't need help. Sometimes children act out because they need help, because they do not know how to properly express themselves. You would arrest them instead. Zero tolerance advocates, IMO are selfish and lazy. They would rather shove the problem as far away from themselves as they can with no accountability on their part.

[WatsonT]

40. The logic is that because some people are capable of terrible acts

we should take a zero-tolerance stance towards everyone for merely expressing the 'wrong' thoughts.


The implications of this are chilling but I suspect there are many who would be quite content (for a while) to trade in our democracy and constitution for a police state if it meant they got to 'win' and implement a universal gun ban.

[Atypical Liberal]

38. How does the NRA throw safety out the window?

The NRA is probably the largest provider of firearm educational services in the world.

They have a program specifically geared towards children, called "Eddie Eagle", whose primary message is "Stop! Don't touch! Tell and adult!"

Yes, the NRA opposes mandatory trigger locks or other mandatory methods of locking up firearms. I agree with this stance - firearms should not have to be mandatorily locked away.

I think if you have kids you should lock up your firearms. I have two kids. I know what kids do. When I was a kid, after school I'd sneak my dad's guns out of their gun case (I knew where the key was) and I'd go blow away model airplanes and the like before my parents got home from work. My firearms are now locked away in a safe. The last thing I want is to be "that guy" whose kids get into their parents' guns and kill themselves or a neighbor kid.

But I don't think it should be mandatory.

Rather, I think if you don't control your firearms and something bad happens with them you should be held responsible and punished.

[WatsonT]

39. Some people who criticized politicians went on to become assassins

Let's arrest everyone who criticizes any politician ever!

Then we can feel safe again.

[Glassunion]

41. I'm fucked!

[WatsonT]

42. I think we all are

[friendly_iconoclast]

44. +1. n/t