Michigan School Shooting. Hope No AR15 or 10+ Mags Were Involved

[Longwalkhome]

Just reading the DA in this case is trying to charge the parents with a law that doesn't exist in that state.

CITIZEN FREE PRESS

The Greatest News Site On The Internet. Home of CFP Nation.

citizenfreepress.com

 

[awshoot]

Just reading the DA in this case is trying to charge the parents with a law that doesn't exist in that state.

CITIZEN FREE PRESS

The Greatest News Site On The Internet. Home of CFP Nation.

citizenfreepress.com

In the heat of the moment it is easy to lash out, and with ugly facts like this, an ugly precedent may be set -- one that severely harms gun owners in general.

On the emotional side of the equation, if they charge the parents they need to charge school officials who are equally complicit. But this is a dangerous road.

On the logical side -- presuming the gun was locked as parents claim -- this is an attack on anyone who can't afford tens of thousands of dollars on a safe or locking device that can't be defeated for example, with nothing but a magnet, such as the locks police use to secure their AR15s (*). Making every gun owner liable for anything no matter what reasonable precautions the gun owners take is something that makes the anti-2A crowd drool. Only people like Alec Baldwin would be able to afford the type of security that might make make guns inaccessible.

Secondly, we just got done watching Binger try to financially destroy Rittenhouse even though he had nothing legit at all. Rittenhouse was lucky to be able to crowd-fund his defense, but for all us regular Joes who get caught up in something like this, there is no winning. Letting the state run wild will cause far more damage in the long run because it is a verity that bending the law to satisfy an immediate desire for vengeance is vastly more destructive than anything related to the specific incident. For example, our entire domestic surveillance apparatus is based on a SCOTUS case in which a purse snatching/harassing caller was made to serve his year or two in the pokey. The vengeance against that prick was not worth the cost to hundreds of millions of innocent victims of our government (**). And the costs aren't done yet -- as the government grows more woke those Constitutional protections regarding privacy that it can now ignore, will surely expand in ways that put people behind bars for what should be protected by the Constitution -- but when we let the Constitution be gutted because we're pissed at someone, we're arranging our own future firing squad.

(*)

(**) https://www.wired.com/2013/10/nsa-smith-purse-snatching/

 

[Longwalkhome]

Media is always able to form an unthinking mob when emotional events take place. Charging the parents for what their kid does is frankly really stupid. Yet people will get on that band wagon and ride it until their own freedoms are taken away. America has been dumb down to the point they don't deserve freedom I guess.

 

[Xaevian]

Just read this thread and how many

In the heat of the moment it is easy to lash out, and with ugly facts like this, an ugly precedent may be set -- one that severely harms gun owners in general.

On the emotional side of the equation, if they charge the parents they need to charge school officials who are equally complicit. But this is a dangerous road.

On the logical side -- presuming the gun was locked as parents claim -- this is an attack on anyone who can't afford tens of thousands of dollars on a safe or locking device that can't be defeated for example, with nothing but a magnet, such as the locks police use to secure their AR15s (*). Making every gun owner liable for anything no matter what reasonable precautions the gun owners take is something that makes the anti-2A crowd drool. Only people like Alec Baldwin would be able to afford the type of security that might make make guns inaccessible.

Secondly, we just got done watching Binger try to financially destroy Rittenhouse even though he had nothing legit at all. Rittenhouse was lucky to be able to crowd-fund his defense, but for all us regular Joes who get caught up in something like this, there is no winning. Letting the state run wild will cause far more damage in the long run because it is a verity that bending the law to satisfy an immediate desire for vengeance is vastly more destructive than anything related to the specific incident. For example, our entire domestic surveillance apparatus is based on a SCOTUS case in which a purse snatching/harassing caller was made to serve his year or two in the pokey. The vengeance against that prick was not worth the cost to hundreds of millions of innocent victims of our government (**). And the costs aren't done yet -- as the government grows more woke those Constitutional protections regarding privacy that it can now ignore, will surely expand in ways that put people behind bars for what should be protected by the Constitution -- but when we let the Constitution be gutted because we're pissed at someone, we're arranging our own future firing squad.

(*)

(**) https://www.wired.com/2013/10/nsa-smith-purse-snatching/

Just read this thread and count how many members have essentially said that he or the parents look guilty based on mug shots.
That is not justice, that is just disgusting.

 

[Longwalkhome]

Just read this thread and how many

Just read this thread and count how many members have essentially said that he or the parents look guilty based on mug shots.
That is not justice, that is just disgusting.

Part of the mob, unthinking and driven by emotion...and looks.

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

Senator Chris Murphy (D., Conn.) on Sunday suggested a recent school shooting in Michigan that left four students dead could "bring people back to the table" on gun control reform.

Senate Dem Suggests Michigan Shooting Can Bring Lawmakers ‘Back to the Table’ on Gun Control | National Review

Chris Murphy claimed that Republicans tend to have ‘epiphanies’ on gun control after mass school shootings.

www.nationalreview.com

Related:

On December 2, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) attempted and failed to pass H.R. 8, the dangerously flawed, so-called "universal" background check bill.

NRA-ILA | Senator Grassley Blocks Gun Control on Senate Floor

On December 2, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) attempted and failed to pass H.R. 8, the dangerously flawed, so-called “universal” background check bill.

www.nraila.org

 

[awshoot]

Senate Dem Suggests Michigan Shooting Can Bring Lawmakers ‘Back to the Table’ on Gun Control | National Review

Chris Murphy claimed that Republicans tend to have ‘epiphanies’ on gun control after mass school shootings.

www.nationalreview.com

Related:

NRA-ILA | Senator Grassley Blocks Gun Control on Senate Floor

On December 2, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) attempted and failed to pass H.R. 8, the dangerously flawed, so-called “universal” background check bill.

www.nraila.org

This is what it is about. The media and politicians have found their hook. While the Waukesha SUV attack fades into memory because of some inconvenient facts about the driver (provided you have a woke narrative to promote), this situation will be milked for all it is worth to push the woke agenda (including the gem: "white males who vote Trump are terrorists"). The hook with the parents and the gun is total catnip for Moms Demand Action and all the others seeking to destroy the Constitution and usher in whatever woke utopia comes next, and many on the right are falling for it.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

This is what it is about. The media and politicians have found their hook. While the Waukesha SUV attack fades into memory because of some inconvenient facts about the driver (provided you have a woke narrative to promote), this situation will be milked for all it is worth to push the woke agenda (including the gem: "white males who vote Trump are terrorists"). The hook with the parents and the gun is total catnip for Moms Demand Action and all the others seeking to destroy the Constitution and usher in whatever woke utopia comes next, and many on the right are falling for it.

I don't think the suv mass killing news lasted even 48 hours in the news cycle. 2 days later all I saw was "rittenthouse" everywhere and almost nothing (or nothing) about the mass murderer who killed children with his suv.

 

[awshoot]

Jonathan Turley thread:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1466885216828600320

I have not seen the evidence that would make a compelling case to say that the parents were complicit criminally as opposed to being negligent. https://foxnews.com/us/michigan-manhunt-ethan-crumbley-parents… Michigan elected not to pass an child access prevention law...
...There is a risk to improvisational element in charging such a case. The question is whether there is actual knowledge or complicity by the parents as opposed to negligence. Otherwise, charges in this case could present strong grounds for challenge.

What Turley is getting at here is that we don't prosecute for something an individual prosecutor thinks ought to be a crime. And he's right -- that's the way of totalitarianism.

The other thing he is getting at is that the legislative history in rejecting safe storage is a strong argument fpr overturning a conviction on appeal. To that point though, that's something only of interest to lawyers really -- the parents will already be utterly destroyed even if they won an appeal. The process is the punishment.

 

[awshoot]

I don't think the suv mass killing news lasted even 48 hours in the news cycle. 2 days later all I saw was "rittenthouse" everywhere and almost nothing (or nothing) about the mass murderer who killed children with his suv.

Yep. The driver was a black supremacist, admiringly quoted hitler, was arguably disappointed with Rittenhouse's acquittal, did not use a gun, and was a beneficiary of woke get out of jail free policies. This does not support the woke narrative and the principle of repressive tolerance (whereby violence by the left is ignored, excused, condoned, and/or supported, and that of the right is maximally repressed) (*) demands that Waukesha be memory holed. Everything is the opposite for the Oxford school shooting so it must be emphasized in the press and punishment/punitive legislation must be swift and severe (except for the wokish which is why the school administrators won't face any scrutiny given they are likely on the "left" side of the repressive tolerance equation).

(*) https://newdiscourses.com/2021/02/c...nquisitors-the-logic-of-repressive-tolerance/

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

This is what it is about. The media and politicians have found their hook. While the Waukesha SUV attack fades into memory because of some inconvenient facts about the driver …

And possibly an inconvenient analogy:

What if California just banned all large vehicles (trucks, vans, etc.) because on rare occasions some crazed individual intentionally drives his car into a group of people, and large cars presumably do more damage? I doubt it. But that is what California has done here—banned a type of firearm magazine that has obvious self-defense benefits when used against a group of assailants, based on a purported harm that, while high-profile, is statistically extraordinarily improbable. Much more improbable than harm from misuse of a car. And while cars are not expressly protected by the Constitution, "arms" are.
The reason I think most of my colleagues on this court would genuinely struggle more with a car ban than they do with a gun ban is that they naturally see the value in cars. They drive cars. So they are willing to accept some inevitable amount of misuse of cars by others.

Other State - California Duncan v Bonta, en banc rules for the state 11-30-21

Today, 11-30-21, after five months of spinning, the 9th Circuit released its en banc opinion https://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/2021-11-30-Opinion.pdf I updated the most recent thread that talked about this case, but don't care to do the other 4 or 5 in this forum.

www.northwestfirearms.com

 

[ma96782]

RE : Videos. No negative reflection on the original creator or poster intended.

______________________


______________________

Wow.....let's put this out on the internet.

Because everyone should have the right to know how to break into things/or just how easy it is to do. And don't get me WRONG. I'm NOT attaching criminal intent by the video posting.

Some "better" judgement? Perhaps? Maybe, but?

Yet.....YouTube has decided that re-loading videos and certain "How To Videos" are now prohibited content.

Aloha, Mark

 

[awshoot]

And possibly an inconvenient analogy:

Other State - California Duncan v Bonta, en banc rules for the state 11-30-21

Today, 11-30-21, after five months of spinning, the 9th Circuit released its en banc opinion https://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/2021-11-30-Opinion.pdf I updated the most recent thread that talked about this case, but don't care to do the other 4 or 5 in this forum.

www.northwestfirearms.com

I suspect there will come a time when school shootings are overtaken by school vehicle-rammings for several practical reasons including the fact that vehicles are easier to get, allowed on school property without question, have "getaway" potential, and are arguably more dangerous than firearms. But I think the quote you selected is spot on: everyone drives (or virtually everyone) and so we'll never see so called "common sense" restrictions on vehicles (and to be clear, I don't think such "common sense" actually is common sense any more than when that term is applied to firearms, but at least we'll have a talking point nobody cares about).

 

[awshoot]

...

Wow.....let's put this out on the internet.

Because everyone should have the right to know how to break into things/or just how easy it is to do. And don't get me WRONG. I'm NOT attaching criminal intent by the video posting.

...

Practical: Do you think the public should be left in the dark about how useless a $150ish gun case is?

Legal: If you are going to face 15 years in prison for insecure storage, do you want to know the device you select has any hope of keeping you free and still owning your home should someone defeat the lock?

 

[ma96782]

RE: Post #314

Yes, there is an intersection point.

And that being said.....is it the RIGHT approach at all?

Would you submit, just because the Govt believes that it's the "proper course of action" to restrict your FREEDOM?
______________

LOL....example.
Couch, cough.....covid. Emergency!

Aloha, Mark

PS.....not even considering the cost of a "security system". But......a zip tie (depending on the actual wording of the law) will probably satisfy the law. Then....depending on probably who is seated on the jury will be another factor. Is that a good way to govern?

Should the Govt even have a place in my home? Really? Remember when the LGBT community fought so hard to get the Govt out of their bedrooms? Yet, some would like nothing better than to have the Govt come back in. Go figure.

While we're at it......let's add Govt 24/7 warrantless surprise inspections. Special Police Inspectors, a special Arsenal Lic. and associated fees to collect.

Isn't THAT just a natural progression?

 

[titsonritz]

Just F'ing crazy that they didn't take the boy home with them at that point. Boy-howdy, how fricken brain dead can parents be?

How the hell did they not search his back pack and locker at that point? Boy-howdy, how fricken brain dead can the school be?

 

[ma96782]

RE : Article link

James Crumbley's ex says he left them strapped for cash, calls Jennifer a 'monster'

Michelle Cobb holds nothing back when describing James Crumbley, her ex-boyfriend and the father of her 18-year-old son.

www.wxyz.com

From the article.

Cobb said while the Crumbleys were giving Ethan whatever Ethan wanted, it was a hopeless struggle to get James to pay $67 a week in child support when he was earning a six-figure income.

Really?

Great Lawyer or just an ancient court order/settled child support case? Forgive me but.....I figure, that most women would/might just say.....


Mark, don't say anything more. You should just believe in whatever a woman says.



Aloha, Mark

 

[No_Regerts]

RE : Article link

James Crumbley's ex says he left them strapped for cash, calls Jennifer a 'monster'

Michelle Cobb holds nothing back when describing James Crumbley, her ex-boyfriend and the father of her 18-year-old son.

www.wxyz.com

From the article.

Really?

Great Lawyer or just an ancient court order/settled child support case? Forgive me but.....I figure, that most women would/might just say.....
View attachment 1083364

Mark, don't say anything more. You should just believe in whatever a woman says.
View attachment 1083366


Aloha, Mark

????

 

[awshoot]

RE: Post #314

Yes, there is an intersection point.

And that being said.....is it the RIGHT approach at all?

Would you submit, just because the Govt believes that it's the "proper course of action" to restrict your FREEDOM?
______________

LOL....example.
Couch, cough.....covid. Emergency!

Aloha, Mark

PS.....not even considering the cost of a "security system". But......a zip tie (depending on the actual wording of the law) will probably satisfy the law. Then....depending on probably who is seated on the jury will be another factor. Is that a good way to govern?

Should the Govt even have a place in my home? Really? Remember when the LGBT community fought so hard to get the Govt out of their bedrooms? Yet, some would like nothing better than to have the Govt come back in. Go figure.

While we're at it......let's add Govt 24/7 warrantless surprise inspections. Special Police Inspectors, a special Arsenal Lic. and associated fees to collect.

Isn't THAT just a natural progression?

I do believe showing the weakness of locking mechanisms should be put on the internet if for no other reason than to allow consumers to make rational purchases (if a $200 gun lock box is as secure as a $35 box -- buy the cheap one and $165 worth of ammo).

"Safe" Gun Storage Laws. Publishing just how easy it is to open these things should help pro-2A legislators work on the legal protections in these laws even if they can't prevent them from passing. For example, an approved list or very clear language about what is required that contains no sneaky wiggle words. That way, no matter how useless the box or safe is, the gun owner is legally protected.

WA doesn't have such a list. When our safe storage law passed, I chose a safe on CA's list, but who knows if that will suffice. That statute uses the term "secure gun storage" without defining what "secure" is. Even worse, the exclusion from criminal liability for using "secure gun storage" only applies to paragraph 1, but not expressly to paragraph 2. One could argue paragraph 2 would also be excluded for various reasons, but once you are making these arguments, you've lost even if you win. https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.360 Our legislation sucks because whoever was on our side didn't have the knowledge about these locks necessary to propose language that protects gun owners from insane prosecutors who want to interpret "secure" or "designed" in politically motivated anti-2A ways. If they saw these videos though, maybe they'd be more proactive.

And then there's tax dollars -- several hundred thousand of those police car locks that can be defeated with a magnet were sold. As a taxpayer, that should tick you off.

So yeah -- these lock picking videos are a public service.

 

[ma96782]

I do believe showing the weakness of locking mechanisms should be put on the internet if for no other reason than to allow consumers to make rational purchases (if a $200 gun lock box is as secure as a $35 box -- buy the cheap one and $165 worth of ammo).

"Safe" Gun Storage Laws. Publishing just how easy it is to open these things should help pro-2A legislators work on the legal protections in these laws even if they can't prevent them from passing. For example, an approved list or very clear language about what is required that contains no sneaky wiggle words. That way, no matter how useless the box or safe is, the gun owner is legally protected.

WA doesn't have such a list. When our safe storage law passed, I chose a safe on CA's list, but who knows if that will suffice. That statute uses the term "secure gun storage" without defining what "secure" is. Even worse, the exclusion from criminal liability for using "secure gun storage" only applies to paragraph 1, but not expressly to paragraph 2. One could argue paragraph 2 would also be excluded for various reasons, but once you are making these arguments, you've lost even if you win. https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.360 Our legislation sucks because whoever was on our side didn't have the knowledge about these locks necessary to propose language that protects gun owners from insane prosecutors who want to interpret "secure" or "designed" in politically motivated anti-2A ways. If they saw these videos though, maybe they'd be more proactive.

And then there's tax dollars -- several hundred thousand of those police car locks that can be defeated with a magnet were sold. As a taxpayer, that should tick you off.

So yeah -- these lock picking videos are a public service.

OMG......I stopped reading right there.

Aloha, Mark