E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSA 15-year-old New Mexico teenager has been charged with the murder of his parents and three siblings. KOB's Maria Guerrero reports.
Police described a “horrific” scene after they arrived at the New Mexico home where a teenage boy allegedly killed his two parents and three siblings late Saturday night.
The five family members were found in their rural home outside Albuquerque. Police identified the victims as Greg Griego, 51; Sarah Griego, 40; and their children Zephania Griego, 9; Jael Griego, 5; and Angelina Griego, 2.
Their alleged attacker was identified by police as another family member, 15-year-old Nehemiah Griego, the Associated Press reported.
The boy was arrested and charged with two counts of murder and three counts of child abuse resulting in death, according to the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department. He has been placed in a juvenile detention center, according to police.
Police found multiple weapons, including an AR-15 style semiautomatic rifle, near the scene of the shooting, according to the AP.
“The victims all had multiple gunshot wounds, and there appeared to be multiple weapons, including an assault-type weapon,” Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department deputy Aaron Williamson told Reuters.
“There’s no other way to say it, except that we have a horrific crime scene down there that we are working on it,” Sheriff Dan Houston said on Sunday.
While little was known about the alleged shooter, a picture began to emerge Monday of his father. Greg Griego, identified as a pastor at Calvary, a local church, was remembered as a caring family man.
“Greg loved his family, he loved his church, he loved God, and was very involved with and had love for people in prison,” Calvary executive director Brian Nixon told NBC affiliate KOB-TV. “He headed up our jail ministry, he had a passion for people and to help them.”
Police: New Mexico teen charged in deaths of two adults, three children
Griego was active in the local community, working with prison inmates at the county jail as well as with area firefighters. He was the brother of former state Senator Eric Griego, KOB-TV reported.
“Chaplain Griego was a dedicated professional that passionately served his fellow man and the firefighters of this community,” Fire Chief James Breen said in a statement, according to the AP. “His calming spirit and gentle nature will be greatly missed.”
“Our family is grieving this terrible tragedy,” family members of the victims said in a statement, according to KOB-TV. “We appreciate the prayers and support we have received and request that the media honor our family’s privacy during this difficult time.”
Down the road from the Griego residence, neighbors were shocked to hear the news.
“It’s a horrible thing,” neighbor Peter Gomez, 54, told the AP. “You see all this stuff that happens all over the country, the shootings in the schools and theaters, and then it happens right here. It’s sad.”
Gomez told the Albuquerque Journal that he did not know the Griego family well, but that he used to see the accused teen walking through the neighborhood wearing "camouflage stuff."
The Associated Press, Reuters, and KOB-TV contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
Prosecute the kid as an adult.
seriously. who in their right mind would want him back out in society after just a few years in a detention center?
His relatives must be so proud. Wait .... he killed them all.
Multiple shots to a 2-year-old baby:
Prosecute, convict, sentence to death and then study his brain.
Something is massively mis-wired in some male brains from birth; it begins to misfire in puberty.
Medical science needs to figure out what happens there and how to test for it when boys are 7 or 8. We already know the genetic markers for criminal behavior (most men in prison carry those markers). Now, researchers need to step on the gas and hone it down from the 1000 or so to 100 and then down to 10. Your son got 'em, well, society ought watch him and you ought not have guns. Either all that, or these males will slowly kill off all the good, sane people - as they breed generation after generation.
Something is really f*d up about this country right now.
when the background on this kid comes out it will read as a time bomb ready to explode, All these mass shootings have on thing in common, a mental deranged person.
Clearly, guns are NOT a problem in this country...clearly.
How were they all killed? What type of gun if any was used........
Take away his guns, and he would have set fire to house while they all were asleep, most likely. Wake up people, it's the mental condition of these people, not the method they use!
Actually, you can wipe that smarter-than-everyone-else smirk off your face, because guns really AREN'T the problem. For every one of these incidents that occur, there are millions of law-abiding gun owners who DON'T commit such crimes with the guns they own. There are 3 million AR-15s in the US. Three were used in mass shootings lately--literally one in a million--and a bunch of cognitively dissonant individuals think we should ban them. The lethality of most hand tools is higher than AR-15s, it's just that those killings rarely get the same press coverage. It amazes me just how stupid people can be. They rely on propaganda, urban legends and ignorance to make their decisions. Try using data; science; facts. I know those are unfashionable right now, but try.
"...if any..."
Are you serious ixlr8? They all had multiple gun wounds and you are asking "if any" gun was used? Seriously?
You realise there's a difference between people killed accidently and those murdered right? If someone killed 26 children with a power drill I'm sure it'd be big news.
The name Nehemiah suggests that the kid grew up in a Christian fundamentalist sect. But of course most folks will simply blame guns for this crazy act of violence.
He liked to wear camouflage clothing? H-m-m-m-m I wonder where he got that idea
Did he watch violent video games? How was he doing in school? Was he Special Ed? Did his school counselor know him? Who were his friends and how did they have fun? Did he have friends?
Maybe his parents could have answered those questions, maybe not. Other people should be able to answer those questions. If they can't, there's part of the problem... more isolation... more people not wanting to get involved.
littlechanges-based on your argument, the kid cleared the gene pool of 5 people carrying those so-called "genetic markers" for crime.
Stay tuned for more event like this from the wacko Nation
Don't be so ready to hang the teen, something doesn't ring true here. I cannot imagine a 15 year old boy using several different calibur guns to kill his family.
"Police found multiple weapons, including an AR-15 style semiautomatic rifle, ..."
Sure, lots of people own assault weapons, but don't kill people. But, why on earth do the actually need these sorts of weapons???
Of course some will claim we need them to protect against tyranny. Sort of like the Branch Davidians, I suppose...
By the way, the Branch Davidians had AR-15s. The Feds were concerned that the Branch Davidians were converting the semiautomatic AR-15s into fully automatic weapons, essentially M-16s. Allegedly, it isn't all that difficult to convert AR-15s to fully automatic. At least that is what the Feds claimed.
No "what if's, ands, or buts," this criminal used guns in this crime...no excuses.....period.
Australia is an excellent example of nearly eliminating gun violence through very strict regulation.
It could be done here with sufficient political and electorate will.
Lets go back to hangings ... until we start punishing people properly they will continue to get away with murder....pun intended. Got 10 bucks that says they'd hang in him Mexico.
And to Never stop ...your right the Aussies would just catch him .. take him out tin the outback and beat his a$$ to death and leave him to rot . Not to many Australians would put up with the stupid $hit.
Am I to assume that anyone walking through the neighborhood wearing "camouflage stuff" could be a threat??
This is a terrible thing to happen but seriously why did the father allow access of his guns to this kid who was obviously a nut case? I have a whole gun safe full of guns but no one knows how to get in that safe except me. If I had a kid that was a problem child I certainly would not allow that kid to have access to my weapons. As to what gun was used in the shooting...I don't believe they mentioned what weapon was used so why mention the fact that there was a AK -15 style weapon in the house? I'm for banning those type of weapons but I'm beginning to understand the outrage of gun fanatics with the media when they do that kind of reporting. Why even mention the gun if it was not used in the crime? I might add that the sheriff was no better for bringing up all the weapons. Was he trying to make a point that since there were so many weapons in the house that this family were somehow different? Strange for a New Mexico sheriff.
@Wilma-2988945
You don't hear about shootings with other guns because generally mass shootings don't involve them. If someone used solely a handgun in a mass killing then yes you'll hear about it. You certainly can't expect every murder to make national news. Sure, they are used in an extremely small fraction of crimes, but they're obviously a much more efficient means or else people wouldn't use them. On the flip side, you also don't really hear of people using AR15's with 30 round magazines as self defense weapons either. There's a reason more and more normal patrol officers have AR15's in their cars now compared to years ago. More civilians have them. I can respect someone being opposed to a ban if they just admit they want it. I hear so many gun enthusiasts saying "they're trying to ban all the COOL guns" which really shows how much of a want it is vs a need. No one needs them. People need to just grow a pair and admit they just want them. It has nothing to do with taking away their rights. You're merely interpreting the 2a differently. Some view it as their right to own A gun while others view it as their right to own ANY gun. Gotta draw the line somewhere.
And as far as guns not being the problem. They're not completely the problem. There's obviously a problem with society these days as well as mental health, but to say guns 100% aren't the problem is being extremely ignorant. Yes, they could strangle someone, stab someone, set a house on fire, beat them to death with a laptop computer. But there's a reason guns are used so often. It's easy and very efficient. Not to mention, you can use anything in an unintended way to kill someone. I could smother someones face in sand, obviously we don't need to look at different sand laws. However guns were invented with the sole purpose of killing things. So every time someone kills someone with a gun, they're using that tool for it's intended purpose.
@Larry-2260635
Blame law enforcement then. They're the ones who told the media what weapons were found. The media is just going to leave details out that were officially reported to them?
Thank goodness new gun laws are coming (and old ones are being reinstated).
Since this is NEW Mexico Larry you might want to save your 10 spot.
The only thing new gun laws will do; if they come, will put decent law abiding citizens in danger.
According to NBC, the big news is that an assault weapon was "found nearby." What's not big news, apparently, is that in 2010 there were almost 13,000 homicides, of which 8,775 were committed with firearms, but only 358 with rifles (all rifles, not just assault weapons). In 2011, 496 people were bludgeoned to death with clubs, hammers, etc., and 728 were killed with bare hands. But that's not newsworthy.
Probably from someone like Ted Nugent! It's not the guns, it's just the availability of them.
Hand tools? Now that's a new one! But once again those were not designed to kill anyone. That whole NRA is so stale and weak. But they seem incapable of coming up with anything else. And that just shows how weak their argument is in reality.
Meanwhile as I write hundreds more weapons sold and this nation further polluted with killing tools. And even more angry Americans walking around armed.
Stunning to see that only .05 of applications for a firearm purchase were denied in the last six months. We need to see rejection rates in at least the double digit numbers. Far too many Americans that own guns who have never been evaluated for mental health conditions. Far too many people with anger management issues buying weapons and far too many whose behavior is regulated by psychotropic medications.
As usual NBC forgot to mention many things that the Albuquerque Journal is reporting on -
The couple had ten children, not clear where they were, but they are alive. The father was a pastor, but was laid off a few months ago (NBC didn't find that news?). The children were home schooled, by their mother - who he shot first. His nine year old brother was sleeping beside the mom, and shot second, the girls woke up and started yelling, he then killed them. His father got home at 6am (5 hours after the initial shootings) - he was shot. The shooter then loaded a vehicle with more guns and had plans to drive to a Walmart, shoot more people and be a "suicide by cop." He called a friend (story gets murky here, but apparently drove to a larger church and waited there.
The father was a former gang member turned pastor and seemed well respected.
Please try harder NBC"News" ....
also Intelligent and Independent - if you would have read the news from Albuquerque - he was not allowed to play video games.. (great, now video games kill people too?)
link: http://www.abqjournal.com/main/2013/01/21/news/five-dead-teen-accused-in-killing-spree.html
Condolences to the surviving children and the rest of the family - this is a tragedy.
littlechanges,
And we should be able to do the same thing to little girls around that age to see which ones become gold digging, deceitful women right?
zorloc
You don't hear about shootings with other guns because generally mass shootings don't involve them.
-------------------------------------------------------------
that is an outright lie..... Columbine, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood and many many other mass killings had zero to do with an assault rifle..... assault rifles are used in a tiny fraction of gun violence, and when they were banned, people just used other guns....
the only reason an AR-15 being 'nearby' was even mentioned is because of the current debate.... what other guns were there? a shotgun is a lot more horrific a weapon when used on a human than an AR-15..
and assault rifles are no longer specifically used as anti personnel... they are wildly popular target, hunting, collecting, etc. guns in the US
you completely do not know what you are talking about....
The fact that more people are bludgeoned to death than killed with assault weapons every year means absolutely nothing to people for whom design is more important than intent. It makes your world a lot easier to understand, doesn't it?
for Never Stop Asking Questions:
"In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s, but an increase of over 40% in assaults and 20% in sexual assaults." Joyce Lee Malcolm: Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control. After a school massacre, the U.K. banned handguns in 1998. A decade later, handgun crime had doubled. WSJ Dec. 2012 online.
This kid killed his family with a hammer! Ban hammers!
More people were killed with hammers last year than with "assault weapons". Are you going to ban hammers? Wait, what type of hammers were used? Were they framing hammers? Were they 5 lb brass hammers? Should we ban the 5 lb brass hammer? Get real people. A firearm is nothign more than a tool. It is an inanimate object. It will do absolutely NOTHING by itself. If a person kills someone with a hammer, they talk about punishing the person. If a person kills someone with an AR type rifle, they want to punish every legal owner out there. That is ridiculous. Bans only work for people who follow the law. Washington DC had a complete ban of ALL firearms for years. They had the highest murder rate in the US for years. It's not a coincidence. Gangs are the biggest problem we have with gun violence. Not law abiding citizens with an AR.
herewego-628322
for Never Stop Asking Questions:
"In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s, but an increase of over 40% in assaults and 20% in sexual assaults." Joyce Lee Malcolm: Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control. After a school massacre, the U.K. banned handguns in 1998. A decade later, handgun crime had doubled. WSJ Dec. 2012 online.
-------------------------------------------------
and home invasions are up 700% in Australia since the ban
Why don't we ever see drug test results on the people who commit these crimes. Are they afraid they might have found MJ in there system? Just saying! All we ever hear about are the guns. How about some real journalism for a change, or are you afraid you would loose your job?
MJ is still considered dope and it effects people in different ways, some passive, some aggressive, but one thing for sure, it does distort reality, just like any drug including alcohol. I guess CA will be one of the first test States.
Zorloc-"You don't hear about shootings with other guns because generally mass shootings don't involve them. If someone used solely a handgun in a mass killing then yes you'll hear about it."
Can you tell me what type of gun was used in Newtown because from what I was told the assault rifle was found in the trunk of a car? Yet it is all that is talked about on the news.
Saxon @ 1.4 above. "All these mass shootings have on thing in common, a mental deranged person."
One other thing also.
The gun owners were irresponsible. They allowed their weapons to get into someone elses hands. I believe gun owners have a responsibility that comes with ownership. KEEP YOUR WEAPONS OUT OF REACH FROM EVERYONE, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AND IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
Denver Bill: You provide numbers that show that over 70% of all homicides are by guns to oppose gun laws? Wow. Maybe you should think a little about your arguments. By your own numbers with 8,775 gun homicides fewer than 1% make national news. The ones that do like this story are mass murders. Do you really think it's media bias that they report mass murders by guns and don't a case where someone in a rage kills someone with a hammer or their bare hands? Point to any case where someone murdered 5 or more people with a club, hammer or their bare hands and it wasn't widely reported and I'll concede the point. Bet you can't.
A semi automatic gun in New Mexico today is searching for a book deal. The possible names of the book
"If I did it"
"I don't kill people"
"Only if I did it"
"Only if the other had one too"
"It didn't matter the other one had too"
"Oh crap. Don't blame me".
Australia halved their gun deaths with stricter controls and regulations, according to the previous Prime Minister John Howard.
Why do gun enthusiasts seem to HATE this and why is it so despicable?
Well said, DJ. The owner of the firearms used in the Sandy Hook massacre did not secure her weapons and that allowed her son to gain unfettered access to them. The same thing happened in this tragic murder. Therefore, one could say, based on the evidence, the thread binding these episodes is irresponsibility and criminal negligence by "gun enthusiasts". The use of a good quality gun safe would have prevented both tragedies but, sadly, far too many gun owners are not nearly so responsible as to secure their weapons and ammo properly. Hence the need for wide ranging and strict gun control legislation. Now. It's the right thing to do.
That is true, but many young men with 'massively miswired' brains don't commit mass murders, either. Truth is, anyone can do it if pushed far enough. It does generally have to be an extreme case of something totally messed up in life, but some folks will be more predisposed to violence than others. And, of course, females tend to strike inwards at themselves while males tend to lash out at others.
There was a somewhat high profile case like this in my state a few years ago involving a teenage girl who allegedly had been abused for some period of time. I don't recall how many people died, but it was several and she's in prison for an extended period of time as a result. I don't think the appeal got her anywhere.
If he was angry enough, he would have had no problems over-killing his family. Literally, to keep striking each victim after they were down. Empty every gun he could get his hands on into them, and it's almost a surprise he didn't go so far as to dismember them or set everything on fire after that. When it's that carried away, it almost becomes symbolic as much as anything else. If he had truly come to hate them that much, he wouldn't kill them but try to keep them presentable for the next person(s) to enter the house. Consider this: Stabbings tend to be very personal attacks by someone who is thoroughly enraged. Most cases do not involve just one slash or stab wound, but multiple stab wounds. Why? When the killer snaps, they inflict injury until they feel it's time for them to stop doing it. The madder they are, the longer it takes them to get over it and come to their senses.
Allegedly. In reality, the AR-15 autoloader rifles, right from the start in 1963, were 'tweaked' to prevent them from readily being converted to select-fire or to full automatic. The basic changes were not fitting the second sear needed for safe automatic operation and altering the bolt carrier by milling away extra metal so it wouldn't trip an auto sear even if someone fitted one, fire control components that wouldn't allow full-auto to occur, and then changing the size of the pins so M16 parts meant to fit larger pins wouldn't readily fit in the commercial AR-15 receiver. Anything that makes the rifle full auto, such as sabotaging the disconnector, is extremely dangerous without that auto sear, which is a safety feature to ensure the rifle cannot fire unless the bolt is closed and locked. Firing a cartridge when the bolt has not rotated into the fully closed position will virtually guarantee a blown up rifle. Sometimes this can even happen if one who doesn't know what they're doing or isn't careful has taken the bolt carrier group apart and forgets to put the bolt cam pin back in when they reassemble it. People seem to be unaware that the AR-15 and the US Rifle, M16 adaptation were never meant for casual users! It was meant for use by personnel (such as soldiers) who would receive intensive training in stripping and reassembling their rifle and intended to be serviced regularly by experienced armorers who knew the design inside and out. The fact that the design can be mostly disassembled without specialized tools is a mixed blessing - very convenient, but also potentially very dangerous!
Where I live, several of the few recent murders we've had involved hammers, hatchets, a snow shovel, and other tools as well as an iron skillet and a number of knives. People use what they've got handy when they finally reach their breaking point. I suspect most of the gun murders are more premeditated than the tool and implement murders, which seem to be somewhat more 'spur of the moment' in nature. We've had a couple of handgun murders, and in those cases, the killer was intentionally targeting the victim and had been going armed with intent before actually committing the murder. I believe in all of those cases, the guns were stolen, and in two of them, the killers went to rather unusual extremes to steal those guns.
This sounds similar to a homicide in my community 20 some years ago, where a pastor's son killed the other over an argument about doing dishes. They were some really wacky denomination and either were some kind of separatists or else they were so far out no one else wanted much to do with them. Just because someone is a pastor doesn't mean that they're a saint, or even a very good parent. Some of them have some very serious personal and family problems that most people wouldn't expect. They are, after all, human. I do know of a number of cases where the children of clergy harbor a very strong resentment towards their parents, and religion, during their teenage years. Sometimes they do some rather atrocious things out of spite more than anything else.
Multiple weapons, no mention of what type of weapon was used, and yet MSN can't wait to tell of a AR15 at the scene in order to push their anti-firearm agenda.
zorloc,
Let use your logic on some other killing machine,
Large flat screen TV’s Fall and kill a child at the rate of 1 every 45 minuets!
No one really needs a large screen TV they just “WANT” them!!!!! I lived 30
years with a 19 inch TV! Should we demand an end to such a deadly device that
no one really needs in the first place?
You were told wrong, MPC01. The Bushmaster was the primary weapon used to kill the children.
The United States has the most powerfully armed war machine in the world, and people don't understand why its citizens, many who are products of that war machine, want to be armed.
Correct, Bob.
You are a really sick and pathetic person if you think that any average anti-gun person smirks or delights at such a tragedy. Please go and see a mental health professional. There is something really seriously wrong with you.
Because gun control threatens their perceived right to accumulate pointless arsenals of deadly toys and it would also force immature, selfish "gun enthusiasts" to be personally responsible for their weaponry and ammunition. They hate that.
Let's use your "logic." Thousands of large screen TVs start falling on people. 10,000 Americans die due to TV-falling violence every years.
Do you really think that no would see a problem here? Do you really think no one would call to make these TVs safer?
Mike I appreciate your argument but when a person is trying to kill with a hammer it's usually one person and not a large number unless it's would be done while everyone is asleep in which case any blunt object could be used. My guns are hunting and defense weapons so keep in mind that the AK-15 is called an assault weapon for a reason. Even the guns I have would not be much defense for someone attacked me unprepared with an AK-15 and neither would an AK-15 if it's locked in a gun safe. My defense gun is by my side at all times but if someone broke down my door and sprayed 30 to 100 rounds all around the room my weapon would be of little use. If the person had a hammer when he broke down the door I would have the advantage. Big difference.
Can you provide some numbers to back this up?
Because according to http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/home-invasions-the-new-fad/story-fn6b3v4f-1226311651859 we get:
It's both ... and most likely more factors as well. Yes, take away the guns, he probably would have tried another method. But another method might not have been QUITE so lethal for ALL.
But as I've said in many other posts ... it's not so much the guns, as the RESPONSIBIILITY for the guns. We hear a lot from those who claim to be RESPONSIBLE gun owners. Does a RESPONSIBLE gun owner allow them to accessed by an (obviously) mentally ill teenager?
That's why in the gun "control" legislation I favor ... it stresses the responsibility of gun owners to prove they can safely operate and SECURE their weapons ... and hands down prison sentences for those who do NOT secure them and the guns are involved in an accidental shooting or crime.
Debora, I read your post calling this The New Mexico. Having lived here for 34 years, I've used that term for many years. Are your from here? Do you like red of green chili?
Anyway, New Mexico receives many illegals from Mexico and from California. To work at WalMart one must be bilingual. We have a big gang problem; they will kill anyone (whites, blacks, hispanics, mexicans, other gangsters) to what ends I can't figure. Its not like there's enough good paying jobs here so to live a middle class life. NM is usually #48 or #49 as far as educating our children. Not very many big companies are located here. Those moving out of California go to all the states around here but don't stop here.
So what does have to do with the Griego boy? Its all part of the world he grew up in; a lot of bad influences to overcome. Not impossible but can be difficult.
@madison-299691
It's interesting that you suggest we go back to public hangings when this article is on the same front page of nbcnews.com
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50532292/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times/
I think you just suggested that we become more like Iran.
i think the boy got his 15 minutes of fame...next little nut will get his to...competive crazy ya'll ain't figured it out yet...in the pshyo mind that's what it's all about...
Yes, Mr Righteous. I lived in Albuquerque for 21 years. Love Green chili cheese fries and Huevos Rancheros. I am waiting for a shipment of green chili now from a friend. We are stationed in Germany and man I miss my good southwestern food.
Oh and the Baloons, what a sight.
Yes Righteous that is one of the reasons I had to leave, I didn't like some of the people my youngest was hanging out with and felt it best to move. I love the mountains, the sun, the food, but not little mexico in downtown Albuquerque.
It is truly sad to see such horrible things happening in such a beautiful place. I so hope somehow, at some point those kids will realize the road of violence is not the best road.
Tell Juan Tabo I said Hello. :) Say question? Is Gardunios still open?
That's exactly right. It's why our army is equipped with DeWalt cordless drills. In the old days they used to have to use long extension cords, but it was a problem during assaults when they went to far and pulled the plug out. Cordless drills were a huge breakthrough.
When did California secede from the union? Lol
Sailcat...in many areas of the US, having unsecured firearms in the house is illegal and they are subject to confiscation. The proper use of a storage device in the home is something that the different gunowner associations have preached for years and helped to pass into law.
One subject that hasn't been discussed much on these comment areas is what sort of medications may have been prescribed for Nehemiah. That has been a common thread with the events of late from Virginia Tech to Aurora.
@bubby's grampa - Here's the link to what you're talking about. There is more to these stories than meets the eye.
http://ssristories.com/index.php
LARRY...for the benefit of the rest of us, what the 'f' is an AK-15?????
I am sure if they all had guns they would have taken their "son/brother" out........ oh wait, they did have guns.
Can everyone spell copy cat? I'm truly afraid now, that all the chickens are coming home to roost. All these confused, angry, misunderstood, teenagers, possibly with mental health issues, are in thousands of homes across our land. They all have seen "The Matrix" films, the "Terminator" films, and all the others films that feature a stand up blow away, by someone dressed in a black overcoat armed to the teeth, with an AR-15 in each hand, dispensing justice with every round. From Columbine to Sandy Hook this is all going to get worse, as every one of these kids reaches escape velocity, and next, reaches for their parent's assault rifle. As these kids are neglected, by caring parents who are busy with their jobs, and other community functions, the kids go off the rails, and want what Lizzie Borden wanted, but where she only had an axe, these modern kids have AR-15s. Imagine shooting a 2 year old to pieces with an AR-15, this kid was way round the bend!! I think people should get used to wearing bullet proof vests as evening attire, or really, whenever they go out for an extended period of time. These kids are all hiding in plain sight, as it were.
Barlow,
I think you watch way too many movies.
I cannot believe the crazy comments I am reading here. This is such a tragedy, a young man has taken out his own entire family. He has his entire life to think about what he has done. There is a lot of blame to go around and if don't address the root cause these things will never stop and yes good parenting, ultra liberal Hollywood media which streams violence in the form of movies and video games to gun rights, all have to be on the table.
I really don't understand the minds of Republicans. Day after day, murder after murder, tragic incident after tragic incident. How many more children have to die before you will admit there is a gun problem in this country?
When this story has more legs, we can judge how this boy got a hold of this weapon and why it was so easily available to him. The problem is not guns. The problem is that responsible gun owners are apparently not so responsible after all. The NRA has blocked most forms of control and compliance of existing laws by backing the defunding of the ATF and other agencies responsible for current law enforcement.
What do gun enthusiasts want? I propose you want it both ways. You want access to all weapons but don't want any restrictions either. What do you want?
I respectfully request why all of my comments have been collapsed?
None of them violate the CoH.
Something tells me that those who would rather live in a civilization that prizes community over a gun-laden, Hobbsean, "state of nature," are not collapsing my comments.
Regardless of Hollywood being portrayed as being video games, as well as movies, and that they are ULTRA Left...regardless of that generality, I think MOST on the left are not happy with the violence in games and movies. I know a lot of right wing people LOVE their action movies & video games, so the generalities don't jive too much, but that said, THIS lefty would love to ban such depictions of violence, in the very least video games. Movies pretty much keep it to a good guy/bad guy theme but video games go beyond that pale today. Ban 'em.
At least 90% of the general Public and at least 80% of NRA members support universal background checks.
With political will and common sense, gun obsession will go the way of cigarette smoking....
Byron,
Sorry misquoted the numbers but its a fact, Why is the Pres not demanding a stop to this??????????
Never Stop Asking.. You need to get more facts and less inuendo. Universal Background Checks are not acceptable to most of both groups you site. No way would any of them support a background check on private sales. And yes, I still smoke cigarettes and don't beleive anyone has the right to stop me doing it either.
voxrationis
You do understand that we have a constitution that gives each and every American the right to own a weapon. So without real justification, like being a felon or documented mental health issues, it's illegal to deny a person, of legal age, a weapon. So you can't just start spouting numbers off and say we need the refusal rates higher. How about looking up how many of those in recent months that have committed these mass murders actually ever applied for a gun permit? I bet it's a pretty low percentage. People that want to do harm will find a way. It's sad that in a lot of these cases the availability of guns is a result of poor security on the part of the owner. But what that says to me is that we need to put more effort on education of gun owners to be responsible and make sure they keep their arms properly secure.
"backtobasics-1076842
Prosecute the kid as an adult."
I'm beginning to wonder why we even have different laws for minors? Their is a reason for it though and it seems everyone is quick to forget it.
Sure there is something wrong with this kid but you have to wonder where these kids are getting all these horrific ideas , like killing everyone in their family, from.
Kids generally copy things they are seeing around them in real life so I thinks their is a deeper problem ,possible, with our society and life styles these days. We see more and more of this kind of thing so you have to wonder why?
Of course the gun lovers will claim its a government false flag job to take away guns.
Well, the father paid the ultimate price letting his (probably obviously disturbed) son have unfettered access to these weapons. So did the Sandy Hook shooter's mom. Hopefully this serves as a lesson to thick-headed parents: That thick head isn't gonna withstand a bullet!
Anyone who's kids commit a shooting because their guns were unlocked should be prosecuted as accessories.
Don't tell me "teach your kids how to properly handle guns". This kid seems to be WELL versed in firearms!
Well, Denver Bill, if you can show me a single where 25 people of any age were killed by bludgeoning, or with bare hands, I'll agree an assault weapons ban is not needed, and that major media outlets are intentionally slanting news reporting.
Nobody with two or more grey cells still firing upstairs would claim that reducing the number of guns in our society would prevent all murders. This latest shooting incident might have taken place with or without a firearm, and certainly did not require an assault rifle to be carried out. But it stands to reason that some of the 8,000 firearm deaths, to which you allude, would never have taken place had the perpetrator not had easy access to a gun.
There are so many guns in our society that criminals have little trouble obtaining one, and I'd suggest that 99.9% of the guns used to commit a crime were, originally, manufactured and sold legally.
I'll probably get hammered for saying this, but I believe any regulation and removing any rights to gun ownership (the 2nd Amendment specifically states "shall not be infringed") is wrong. Too many people in this country have their rights taken away due to exceptions made without legally voting for an amendment allowing those exceptions. For instance, how many people have had their right to vote removed without an additional amendment changing the original? It appears our founding rules and laws are completely ignored.
If we actually followed our own Constitution and Bill of Rights, or made changes as necessary as prescribed, our country wouldn't be in such a state of chaos.
Sorry, but game controllers do not make someone a killer. Neither does wearing cammo or dying your hair black or any other ridiculous excuse the media and others seem to come up with. Those are excuses, crappy grasping at straw excuses.
Something is wrong with the kid, but we as readers cannot know what because the media will only allow us to read what they want us to read. Many places take quotes from family/friends/neighbors out of context. It's actually encouraged among journalists to put a 'spin' on the story. But unless anyone here has any insight as to what kind of home life this kid had, we won't know and I highly doubt he'll be allowed to give a straight answer. Either way, what he did was wrong and I can't find it really very easy to pity him.
BigMowma...thanks for the link; I knew that I'd seen it somewhere and couldn't relocate the item. Obviously prescribed psychotropic medications have more to do with these events than our mainstream media is publishing. Pity, they would be doing a greater service to the population as a whole by examining the subject of the cause, in lieu of sensationalizing the effects.
That would seem logical and a step toward solving a greater problem.
a---rand - more likely than marijuana, what we'd probably see is that a lot of these young people doing this are on some adhd, anti-depressant, etc...
We may very well be seeing more kids (ie, under 18) committing these murders than we used to (I haven't checked the numbers), but you realize that marijuana has been around since the beginning of time and only in the past 2 decades or so have we started the mental medicating of our youth. Those are the numbers I'd like to see.
Tired in Tx,
Actually it is one child injured every 45 minutes by big screen TVs. We only kill one every three weeks. So annually, it's close to the death toll of the Newtown shooting, not counting the almost 12,000 injured.
Think about it. Who really needs a TV with all those pixels? Maybe we should consider banning high pixelated TVs! Why can't people just lock these up in a big safe or cabinet when kids are around? Is that too much to ask? And we all know those TVs are often used to display acts of violence and murder in high resolution detail! There seems to be no useful purpose for such devices. Thankfully there are nowhere near as many of these things out there as there are guns, but it is only a matter of time.
It has me thinking that I'd better go out and buy one while I still can!
OK, I'll admit it's a pretty crazy comparison, however why is it that almost 20 kids die every year from these things and nearly 12,000 are injured, and until I read your post and Googled it, it is the first I have ever heard of this? Why is there no public outrage about this? Are all those kids not worth it? As best as I have been able to determine there are somewhere around 20-30 million of these out there depending on the definition of "large". If you extrapolate the statistics to a level like the number of guns, you're talking about killing 200 or more kids every year and injuring 120,000. Shouldn't we be outraged? Shouldn't the public be demanding some type of safety measures? Why not demand that these come with some sort of anti-tipping devices or retention straps?
The point is that nobody even knows about this because the media has ignored this story. They ignore a lot of stories that involve people's lives. Some estimates say that as many as 100,000 people die each year because of mistakes in the healthcare industry? Isn't this outrageous? We all complain about the cost of healthcare, but who's complaining about all these deaths?
I am very Progressive and a big Obama supporter, but I can npt support all this manufactured outrage about so called "assault weapons". I believe, and the Supreme Court agrees, that we are all entitled to own a gun for our own protection. I don't buy the idea that the 2nd Amendment is about protecting from us an unjust government. But I do buy that it is a guaranteed individual right to allow us to protect ourselves. Some will argue that I don't need an "assault weapon" to protect myself, but really who is to make that decision for me? There are a lot of potential scenarios where that "assault rifle" fills that self protection need far more effectively than a revolver. Most people don't see that, but if you live in the country, it makes a lot more sense for a variety of reasons.
I probably wouldn't be so against it if it were not for so many saying, "It's a good first step." So what are the follow-up steps? Bottom line is the original "assault weapons ban" came out of efforts by the Brady Campaign. Anybody who isn't clear about this group desiring to eliminate all firearms from public ownership, simply hasn't paid attention. If you read the posts on the topic, I see about 20% of the anti-gun posts as being entirely anti-gun. And about another 10-15% who want far more restrictions than being proposed. Does anyone not see why gun owners would have concerns about this?
Statistically, we should be outraged much more by many things that we have a much better chance of doing something about. Is the big screen TV thing not a worthy issue that might be very easy to solve without fears of infringing on someone's rights? The media has created this outrage. I suspect that the Sheriff in this case probably didn't just volunteer the AR-15 thing, but very likely some reporter was asking it at the press conference. Some reporter who wanted it to be part of the story. All these things are tragic, but why isn't the discussion focused on the mental illness aspect that is a common thread in virtually everyone of these cases? Why isn't the media pumping up that aspect to these stories? By my accounts only about 1-2% of the news stories even approach addressing that issue. Frankly, we all ought to be outraged about that.
All that said, Tired in Tx, I probably disagree with you about most of the rest of your politics, but I may be at least in partial agreement with you about guns. Rather than distorting statistics like you did, I'd rather see you debunking the distorted statistics being thrown out by the far left wing of my cohorts. Things like the made up, 40% number being assigned to gun sales without background checks. A made up number. How do you produce data on a thing that by definition has no data recorded? Turns out this number was extracted from a "survey" done before the background check law was enacted. This is a bogus number for so many reasons, yet it is being thrown around like a fact. So kindly don't make stuff up or distort it to make your point. I just makes you less credible. I know this is a classic tactic of the right and I have fought it for years. I used to take pride in the fact that the left rarely did this. But these days I am embarrassed by how "we" are using these slimy tactics, just like our long time foes have for years.
What is odd to me is that from these "Articles" you can assume that Every. Single. Wife, Father, Sister, Brother, cousin, daycare assistant, bus driver, McDonald's patty flipper, fisherman, hospice nurse, golfer, insane ex girlfriend/boyfriend, skydiver, dog-walker, mental patient, dentist, lawyer, dance instructor, teacher, taxi driver, Amish Mafia Gangster, toddler, tree, bush, rock, and bird in America owns an AR- Muther F'n 15! Isnt that a little bit odd or coincidental to anybody? That all of these "Stories" involve an "Assault Type Weapon"?
Next we are gonna Have instead of a dog "raping" another dog and the owner getting sued (ridiculous), we are gonna have a dog that digs up old Civil War guns in the park and the owner gets thrown in prison for dangerous assault weapons procurement.
It just all depends on you and how far you'll keep on going to fetch that ball that they throw you I guess
Never Stop Asking Questions Comment collapsed by the community
Maybe get a clue before you start espousing "solutions". Australia bought all of the guns they banned, approx 600,000 of them. There are FAR in excess of 300 MILLION semi-auto guns in the US. CLEARLY it would take far more than "political and electorate will" to accomplish the same thing here.
Also worth noting is that, over the same time period, the rate of gun violence in the US has declined at the approx the same rate as it did in Australia suggesting that the ban had less to do with the outcome than people like you want to pretend it did.
Yeah, I wear camo, too. My granddaughter likes the pink camo. My grandson likes the blue camo pjs. My son wears camo to work everyday. He's military, but it counts. Guess what, none of us has a violent bone in our bodies. Gee, wow.
I have an assault rifle, as well. Yep, grandma has a gun (or three). It is under lock and key. If someone broke in, I could only use it for a club, because I'd never get it unlocked in time to use it as a firearm.
We have violent and evil people on this planet. They come in all colors, ages, shapes and sizes. We can't pick out one from the other until something happens. We hear of all these dreadful incidents, and all we can do is just shake our heads. However, statistics (yeah, I know, they are cold and calculating) show that the percentage of these events is rather small in contrast to our population.
No one wants to hear/see one--NO ONE, but they do happen, even though they are rare. Our media examines every single blood drop to wring out one more line of press. (I really don't want to know the bloodthirsty details, but they are shoved in my face anyway.)
In this country of 400 million people, we have some terrible, violent tragedy happen on a somewhat regular basis. On the other hand, the number ratio, in comparison, is miniscule. I don't mean to lessen the horror of this crime in any shape, way or form. I simply want to put it in perspective that we are not experiencing an escalation, so much as we are just experiencing more information. I don't know if that will help anyone or lessen their fears, but these vile acts are few and far between.
I will be interested to hear what details come from the boy. I'm sure the laundry list of 1. bad homelife; 2. bullying; 3. drugs; 4. abuse, etc. etc. etc. will be pulled out and gone through. It's almost becoming a joke, and that's so sad. I'd really like to hear the real reasons. Of course, I/we never will.
At this time, the only thing I can really do is offer my condolences to the surviving family members. I can't tell them things will get better. I can't offer any real comfort except to say I'm sorry. And I am sorry.
Ever noticed how when women gun supporters post - they post just like a man.
Sorry NRA plants - I've been posting to forums for over 10 years - I know a man post from a woman post.
Near the scene? How near? 4 doors down in a gun safe?
All I'm going to say besides it's not the gun that killed them but the deranged person using it (which has been said over and over) is that at least this time the writer didn't call the rifle an assault weapon.. Assault weapons are fully auto and used by the military and police only.. It's nearly impossible for a citizen to get a permit for one. Oh yeah I almost forgot.. Criminals can get them fairly easily on the black market too.. Banning guns probably isn't going to make those guys give up their guns do you think?
Guess we are lucky when he decided not to head off to school, or the church or even the mall and finish the job with a "big" encore!!!
zapper45701, If you have an assault rifle then you are a government agent or you own it illegally.. You could perhaps be a collector in which case it would have to have been permanently disabled so it could never fire. Assault weapons are not out there for the public to purchase PERIOD. You may have a semi automatic rifle, shotgun or pistol but not a true assault rifle.
Byron Raum
Can you provide some numbers to back this up?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
in 1997, immediately prior to Australia's ban, they had 231 armed robberies in a residence, their definition of 'home invasions'... in 2011 they had an 11% residence / community armed robbery rate equaling 1604 home robberies.... up 694%
also, since the ban... rapes by perps unknown to the victim who broke into a residence have exploded to 3 times the rate in the US... think about that for a second.... since the ban, Australians have become THREE times more likely than an American to get raped at home....
you can probably draw several inferences.... but one that comes to mind immediately is that criminals know non criminals are much more likely to not be able to put up a fight now because they don't have guns... so why not rape / kill / rob people by just breaking into their home? piece of cake and nearly zero chance of getting shot or caught
the 1997 stats are all over the web.... 2011 Aus study on crime here:
http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/0/B/6/%7B0B619F44-B18B-47B4-9B59-F87BA643CBAA%7Dfacts11.pdf
the one constant fact in this debate: the anti gun people always cherry pick BS stats because they have to: reality doesn't support a ban of either ARs or magazines, much less guns
banning ARs and magazines just takes one type of weapon off the pile... in this case a wildly popular one that a staple of gun owners in the US, and a magazine type that is a huge time saver for the sporting public... it's absurd
Devon, I inherited it. I was told that was what it was. Oh well, no big deal, it's put away. I don't even know if it shoots. I have other "weapons," and I never bothered to buy rounds for it. Nevertheless, it will make a fine club if I need one. I think the .44 will handle any of the light work. (BTW, I have plenty of rounds for the .44, though they are expensive. I target shoot with it on occasion, but not as often as I would like. Like I said, very expensive.)
J_P_PatchesPal_1:
Although I am in support of the 2nd Amendment, I'm sure we've crossed paths and you've read some of my posts in support of humanity.
@littlechanges
"His relatives must be so proud. Wait .... he killed them all.
Multiple shots to a 2-year-old baby:
Prosecute, convict, sentence to death and then study his brain.
Something is massively mis-wired in some male brains from birth; it begins to misfire in puberty.
Medical science needs to figure out what happens there and how to test for it when boys are 7 or 8. We already know the genetic markers for criminal behavior (most men in prison carry those markers). Now, researchers need to step on the gas and hone it down from the 1000 or so to 100 and then down to 10. Your son got 'em, well, society ought watch him and you ought not have guns. Either all that, or these males will slowly kill off all the good, sane people - as they breed generation after generation."
Wow Little, I can't believe you typed that last paragraph because no female has killed before I guess, yes that stats will show men kill more than woman, but don't think the female species is far from innocent in killing. You sound more like a disgruntled ex-straight now lesbian scorned woman. Notice how they focus the research on men, even if men possess this marker I suppose they should all be nutured and put in jail? I'm guessing you are a liberal so where is the personal freedom in that? I guess personal freedom to the left and right wing nutjobs only matters if it's on their side of the fence, in no way can you do anything to anybody until they have done something wrong. And just because they think they have this marker down doesn't mean it's the only cause, the brain is very complex and emotions and daily stress and so much more factor into ones decision to do wrong.
@niteowl
Ok I don't go this route very often, and I going to hold my temper. Banning video game violence will do nothing. Those games have rating you know, don't let your kid play a game that blows the head of the enemy how's that for commonsense, I hate to say it, because it's going to make me look violent, but If I could, I would slap you lightly across the face to not hurt you but to get your head out of your a--.
Big pharma needs to be taken a look at before movies, video games and gun laws, follow the money you might find better answers. Video games don't make me violent, people who think it's just as easy as banning something that has been around longer than most of the violent acts do. I don't have the answer either, none of do, but commonsense would dictact looking at the medical realm before you looked at the others. Mental instability is the pretty obivious common factor in all these cases of gun violence, now it's finding the mental instability and why it's like that, and what can be done without adding more meds to it to fix it.
Has anyone even looked at how many meds/legla/illegal drugs are floating around this country that scare me far more than any gun could. I can handle someone with a gun that is trying to kill me, but shooting someone 6 times and they keep coming and feel no pain is a different story.
I'll say it once again...Japan has a way lower crime rate than us....guns are banned there.
Unfortunately, its too late to ban guns in the US...to many people have them. Best thing to do is to enforce stricter gun regulations. People keep saying mental health is the issue. But I work with the mentally ill in elementary schools...do you know just how many people are mentally ill? And there is a difference between mentally ill and emotionally ill. That's over half of America. Anybody is capable of snapping without mental illness. And adolescents in their stages of puberty often have emotional issues. They are growing at those stages and sometimes it can make them more moody and violent. I know, I'm around them all day as a paraprofessional. Best thing for them is to not be exposed to anything that says M for mature or rated R for adult audiences. The music on the radio makes it inevitable because there isn't much music on the radio that's "wholesome". But keep in mind and make sure that the music doesn't promote hatred, anti-government, or killing anyone. Media is also a teacher, just like parents and teachers at school. It teaches us all about the world we live in. If your child is heavily exposed to good things, I have noticed that it affects the child for good. If exposed to violent things, they tend to be more tolerant of violence, and sometimes more aggressive.
People don't want to admit it because we like these things, as humans it entertaining. But these things have ratings for a reason. Young people especially adolescence younger than 18, when hormones are jumping, should not be playing and watching these kinds of things.
Japan is 90% Japanese, so how does that reflect anything worth mentioning in the USA? They have gun controls since day one, when guns were introduced into the country after Capt Perry forced them to open their borders and allow Western traders to enter the country.
They also have records of their citizens, going back hundreds, in some cases - thousands of years. They still have class based marriages based on what jobs your family lineage was doing back then.
The anti- gun and anti-god nuts can go wild now.
Absolutely, because we all know, god and guns wasn't involved in this.
Oh, yeah, they were.
Probably turn out that the kid has been abused by the parents since he was 3 and he just wanted to end the abuse.
@kpm58 - if they two year old had a gun this would never have happened right?
kpm58, Equating guns issues with GOD, is a such a retarded thought that based just on that, you should not be allowed to own a gun ever....I think also you should not be allowed to drive or have any kids...People like you are a tragedy waiting to happen.
This is a government conspiracy to take away U.S. citizens guns. Another AR-15 rifle noted by this report is too coincidental. How many in the last few months where you rarely heard of this. This is a plant by the ATF or CIA......
IXLR8- Not sure if serious or just trolling...hmmm...
KPM58,the pro gun and pro god nuts are giving the anti gun anti god nuts plenty of ammo.
I can picture what screwed up this kids mind
3ric, read the Swat story just posted, another AR-15 involved. It just seems way too coincidental and thats what I am saying......
Clearly there wasn't enough guns in this house. The answer to gun violence is arming everyone with guns, right?
Get real and stop being paranoid. The government is not going to take away everyone's guns. They're just trying to stop the sale of assault weapons and multi-round clips that are meant to kill people. If you still want to prove your manliness by killing innocent animals, just go ahead.
These killings, as I expected, seem to be more numerous since Sandy Hook. Copycat crimes.
You'll still be able to kill people if you're so inclined, just not so many in such a short period of time. If you want to stop mentally unstable people from having guns, that will be almost impossible, even with a background check. If you know you're living with a mentally ill person or have children/teens, make sure your guns are locked up and have trigger guards on them. That's probably the best you can do.
IXLR8 - "another AR-15 involved" - that's what irritates me about this story. Multiple weapons were found, they didn't identified what he used, but yet they feel the need to call out that model to feed the current hysteria/hype.
A kid killing his family does not require a special weapon - anything will do including a hammer, fire, etc.
If you haven't noticed lately, but the liberal media will only run murder stories where an AR-15 or similar weapon is used or found at the scene. Don't worry about all the other murders around the country. Only focus on the ones where a rifle is used.
Kris,
What is a ban going to do? Really explain it to me. Here's what happend during the 1994 ban.
23 School shootings where there were multiple deaths
153 Total killed in those shootings
233 total school shootings not resulting in a death.
The last ban didn't prevent squat. All it did was keep law abiding citizens from properly being able to defend themselves.
The President is going after this in a completely wrong way with the exception of background checks. I don't agree on how to implement it, but that's for another discussion. What needs to be done is make prison terms mandatory for any crime where a gun is either in possession or actually used. Say 20 years mandatory if a crime is committed while in possession of a gun, and life if a gun is used in a crime. No plea deals, no excuses. Commit a crime while in possession of a gun and go to prison for a long time. Stronger gang enforcement would also be needed, as that is the most common area for gun violence/murders.
jayinfl, that is actually my point and I am not paranoid, I have all I need. It's the association now with an AR-15 "in the house" when it was probably never used. The anti-gun nuts are way out there with the hype.
I'm not understanding a church pastor owning multiple guns including an assault rifle. Raised as a Catholic, I always thought priests and pastors tried to be like Jesus in their thoughts and actions. Christ didn't carry weapons, rather he turned the other cheek and forgave those that harmed him.
Jayinflorida,
I agree, every story we are seeing seems to have in common the AR15 "style" as its referred to in this story even though many other guns were in Daddy's gun safe they only mention the AR15"style" what "style" is that??the scary looking style? And in the other story this morning with the Swat team they call it a rifle,then an Assault gun they are just stirring the pot to scare all the anti-gun people,And keep the Gun scare frenzy going.In Sandy Hook's first reports they actually show the "Assault rifle" in the Trunk of the car and was not the weapon used,but that is the one we keep hearing about...sounds like an agenda to me,Every story since Sandy Hook the gun used in every single murder has been a " Assault AR15" near by,not necessarily used but near,Super hard for intelligent self thinking people not to believe a real agenda is being pushed.
Dirp:
Look up "Trey Sesler Waller Texas". He was a grade above me, and March of last year he killed his mother, brother, and father, then waited at the local Jr. High with mounds of weapons & ammunition for the kids to get let out for the day. He killed his family so they wouldn't have to live with the shame, after he killed a bunch of Jr. High kids...luckily he had a change of heart, and decided not to shoot the kids while he was watching them all leave.
Watching his taped confession was really something else...good to know all throughout school some psycho was dreaming of killing us all.
There weren't really any signs. His family was wonderful to him, and loved him very much. He wasn't picked on at school. He had friends. None of them even saw it coming. He had an interest in violent anime and video games though...
Some people don't really need a reason, they're just sick. & sometimes it's not noticeable, but I really like how you are instantly assuming the VICTIMS brought it on themselves.
I guess it is about time we should consider putting security guards in all houses in the US. /s
Big vote up to what you said, Kris.
I'd even go a step further as a way to keep "legally registered" guns out the hands of mentally unstable folks. You buy a gun (private owner, gun show, reputable dealer), after an extensive background check is done to see if you are a criminal. you register the weapon with law enforcement, who in turn, gives you an appointment to get your first mental health checkup that you must submit to if you are to legally own a firearm (yes, hunters and recreational tincan-plinkers, that means you, too). These will be done on an annual basis, and paid for by the gun owner. You want to own lethal weapons capable of killing scores of people in seconds, you can own them....the rest of us just need to know you are mentally sane enough and capable of knowing the immense responsibility of gun ownership.
To add to this responsibility, if your firearm is stolen and used in the commission of a felony, YOU, as the registered owner of the gun used, will be prosecuted for the same crime as the actual criminal. It'll make you think twice before you leave your arms lying around in gun racks for everyone to see, and not stowed away in gun safes, with the ammo stored in a separate area.
I'm not sure why, but most of the gun owners I've spoken with seem to think they have the right to own as many of whatever gun they choose, and yet, should not have the added responsibility to maintain society's safety by securing those weapons, tracking those weapons and seeing that the owners are mental stable enough to own them. Nobody is saying you HAVE to own a gun, but if you choose to own one, then you must choose to allow background checks upon any firearm transaction, you must register your weapon with authorities, and you must submit to annual mental health checkups. And the laws should be changed to make it so that if your weapon is lost or stolen, and you do NOT report it to the authorities, that you, ultimately, will be prosecuted if that weapon ends up in the hands of criminals and is used in the commission of a felony.
John in PA
It seems that you can not understand how someone, like a pastor, can own a firearm and not be obsessed with killing another human, that there can not be any other reason for owning a firearm.
Well that is one of the differences between sane law abiding gun owners and LWNJs.
@devil's advocate,
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
Everything you mention is an infringement upon our rights. How would you like those same requirements for being able to freely speak or join a church? IT's the same principle. Registration doesn't work.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has
full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and
the world will follow our lead into the future!"
Adolph
Hitler
Chancellor, Germany, 1933
Also, let's say your car is stolen and the people use it to murder 100 people in drive-by shootings. By your logic you would be held responsible for the 100 deaths.
So. KPM58, using your reasoning, if Jesus had had a gun, he could have avoided crucifixion?
My point is, does a pastor, who tries to emulate Jesus, need an arsenal? One gun ought to take care of protection, right? That's what I'm having a hard time understanding. Seems he couldn't leave the gang life behind.
Now, if trying to use a little logic to understand this situation, and asking a question that appears pertinent makes me a "LWNJ", then so be it. Makes you a big, tough guy to post anonymous insults doesn't it? Probably makes you even tougher to own a bunch of guns, too?
John,
Perhaps he liked to go to the range? You CAN be a gun enthusiast, and NEVER kill a living thing.
Just like I said. It seems some people can not understand how someone can own a gun and not be obsessed with killing another human, but I am sorry to say that they are obsessed with those thoughts.
@IXLR8
Conservative estimates suggest 750,000 to a million Americans own an AR-15 or clone thereof. Those are the number one selling rifle in America. Doesn't seem like much of a conincidence to me. In fact, it seems statistically logical.
I have 34 firearms. Ranging from Flintlocks, wheellocks, percussion cap to revolvers, semi-auto handguns and rifles, to full-auto BAR and M-16. I have a suppressed M107. Almost all of my weapons were used during one of America's military conflicts, or styled after a weapon that was used. I have never shot anyone, nor have I ever shot an animal. I do love my time on the range. There's something peaceful about it. Looking through the scope on my M107 at my target 1,500 yards away, and seeing the grass blowing in the wind, leaves fluttering on the trees, and clouds passing overhead. It's just peaceful.
Beth,
Care to tell me what the number 1 gun used in a crime is? Calibur will be acceptable.
Extensive background check, huh? Either you're a convicted felon, or you're not. The FBI does have a very good handle on that one. Mental health history is where they're hurting, but only because half the states haven't been reporting that information, which isn't public record anyway, to the federal government. Criminal convictions are public record and aren't that difficult to find. Sometimes the bigger problem is determining that the person you're checking doesn't share the same name as a convicted criminal, which is very common in the case of Smiths, Johnsons, and Andersons!
Much of the time, that's exactly what you do if you intend to carry the gun on your person in public - its serial number is on record with the master copy of your permit and that had better be the only gun you're found with if you're not on your own property or at a designated shooting range.
Beware the unintended consequences! It's hardly a secret that there is a great scarcity of mental health professionals in large areas of the US these days. Unfortunately, people with mental illnesses often are unable to earn much of an income and when they are finally able to get some treatment, someone else is paying for it but only the least amount that has to be. On the other hand, the lion's share of gun owners are financially well off, especially those who own many firearms. Since they would be required to have that evaluation, if it takes a generous cash outlay to ensure that they get their clean bill of mental health, so be it. Where the psychologist or psychiatrist feels lucky to break even while receiving public money to treat patients, they would do very well signing off/rubber stamping wealthy gun owners all day every day. Why mess around trying to take people who are actually in need of help but cannot afford to pay for the services rendered when you can just make loads of cash working with people who need no real attention whatsoever?
Sometimes the solution is worse than the problem.
Wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Legally, that just doesn't fly. As it is, and will remain, if you took reasonable precautions to safeguard your firearms from theft, such as locking them up, you're off the hook if someone breaks the lock or steals your safe and you report the theft. If you don't do any of those things, you can be charged with various crimes depending on the jurisdiction you're in, but the only way you can be charged with the same felony as a perpetrator using your stolen gun is would be if you were actively involved in the same crime or some direct link could be proven, such as if you somehow allowed your guns to be stolen, knowing that they would be used to commit the crime crime in question, making you an accessory.
I guess that would be a great way to put somebody's widow or ex in jail! A great many stolen firearms were taken from the homes of people who did not purchase them but ended up with them after the original owner moved on in one way or another. And, of course, this is assuming that the gun can be traced back. Provided the dealer hasn't gone out of business in the meantime, they're only required to keep the BATFE Form 4473's for twenty years. So, right now, dealers can, and usually do, dispose of records earlier than January 21, 1993. I've seen a dozen years' worth of forms when I worked for Wal Mart once upon a time, and that was maybe something like 20 medium sized boxes; all that paperwork takes up a lot of room for a dealer who does any amount of business. A gun trace starts with BATFE going to the manufacturer, who tells them what distributor the gun shipped to. The distributor tells the BATFE what dealer bought it, and the BATFE visits the dealer to see the Form 4473 and who's name is on it. The process goes fairly quickly, but has some limitations by design to prevent abuses. Without a serial number for a specific gun, they can't 'go fishing', for instance. There's a lot of guns out there that were bought more than 20 years ago, though, and many are handed down from one generation to the next. Record keeping in earnest only began in 1968, and before then a lot of lesser quality rifles, shotguns, and handguns didn't even have a serial number. There is a startling number of guns out there that would trace back only to some long defunct hardware store or to a purchaser who has been deceased for some time. There isn't much that can be done in those cases.
Dawgfan says...
Also, let's say your car is stolen and the people use it to murder 100 people in drive-by shootings. By your logic you would be held responsible for the 100 deaths.
Apples and oranges, my friend! Let alone the fact that if you take the "firearms" out of the hands of the people using your stolen car, now you have a drive-by "non-shooting" of 100 people!! Sounds less deadly, doesn't it?
All kidding aside, I think I understand the point you were attempting to make. That if it weren't a gun, one could steal your car and maybe use the car itself to hit innocent people with the express intent on murdering them. Set aside the fact that this kind of thing happens more than you think, and the death toll is VERY low. The simple fact is, there is no way we, as a nation who requires wheeled transportation to get people and goods from one place to another, can be sustained without having automobiles. These are a much-needed necessity! Now, are you saying we need to all park in garages with armed security, even at home? Of course you aren't! We already require that all autos be registered. We already require that if our vehicle is stolen, that it is reported to the authorities. Here's where your logic errs a little. Once the cops get your stolen vehicle report, they will, most likely find it, because it's pretty damn hard to conceal it, short of swapping out the plates. And, that's why I'm in favor of requiring all motor vehicles to have some sort of "Lo-jack" technology be installed, so even if the cops do not spot the vehicle before it is used to plow into people, it can be made inoperable so that it's pretty well useless as a weapon.
Can we do the same thing with firearms that fall into criminal hands....make them inoperable? No, we can't. Can cops find the stolen guns as easily as finding a stolen car? No, they can't.
Can we, as a nation, be better off by initiating common-sense requirements on gun ownership? Yes, we most certainly can!
So Devil if I want to sell you a guy I have to do a back ground check on you? So I get the right to check out you are mentally stable?
So it doesn't matter how many people are killed with it if you deem it a "necessity" but it should be heavily regulated if a tiny fraction of that number are killed with it and you don't deem it a "necessity"?
Tom, I, as the purchaser of your gun, have to submit to a background check before I can purchase or otherwise receive the gun into my legal possession. This should cost you nothing (and if it does currently have a cost to do it, you just add the cost to the purchase price). And, it will be up to me to be given a clean bill of health from a registered mental health doctor BEFORE I can purchase the gun from you. You do bring up a point, though....you should not be able to sell me a firearm without first requiring to see that I have been verified as clinically mentally fit enough to own one. Therefore, it's up to the potential purchaser to get this verification before any firearm sales happen.
It does sound radical, but my God, look at the alternatives! Either we go back to the wild west, where everyone is armed and nobody is held accountable, or we go to the other extreme, and all guns are made illegal. I'm just saying, gun ownership, as it stands now, has little in the way of personal responsibility to society's wellbeing. If you have to jump through a few extra hoops so that we curb all these killings by mentally unstable people, why do you all object to this? It's puzzling to me, that's all.
Devil,
Vehicles are responsible for over 33,000 deaths a year. Firearms are responsible for around 10,000. Many people would consider firearms a necessity for their safety. Other would argue that they are a necessity to live because they need to hunt for food. You have a better chance of being killed by a car than you do by a gun.
Based on the NRA's proposed solution to prevent gun violence, for schools being assaulted by armed gunmen ... maybe we need to increase the use of Guards - expand them to be stationed in Family homes too...Or, maybe a better solution might be - some form of control over who has "assault weapons" and whether they are secured in the home?
This internecine assault was not a terrorist act carried out by unknown gunman who illegally got weapon and went berserk. It was all in the family. Dad may have even taught Jr. how to shoot, for best results, maximum damage.
Devil,
How would any of that stop any of the murders where the guns are stolen or bought by straw purchase? Both of those are already illegal, but does nothing to prevent the murders. Sure, it may catch a few people, but in reality it will do nothing to stop the violence. How would the above stopped Sandy Hook? What about all the other 10,000 murders each year?
I would NEVER allow any type of semi or otherwise assault weapon into my house for ANY reason. A small gun could be easily deeply hidden out of reach of a child of any age, and locked, and ammunition not kept with it, but a large rifle, how can you hide it? Not everyone can afford a gun safe and obviously the one's that have killed so many lately, were not very secured.
It doesn't matter, as that is neither the point the OP was trying to make, or the one I was making. I simply said it was statistically logical, as the AR15 is the largest selling rifle in the country and in the hands of probably a million people, it was at the crime scene.
Most ILLEGAL weapons were LEGAL at one time. Forcing gun owners to be responsible for their weapons (keeping them secure, proving ability to handle them, requiring a background check to transfer ownership) will NOT stop all gun violence. We aren't naive enough to think it will. But it will have an impact on it and it's a positive step forward.
I love to target shoot as well as anyone. I have a natural dead eye. I am a good shoot even if I don't have practice time. What is wrong with keeping the most powerful guns at the range, and rent them for use. I understand collecting, but when you own so many, how do you insure that they will not be stolen? When are there too many guns out in the public that no one is safe from THEM???
The NRA has successfully blocked funding for the ATF by their buying of our representatives in the House and Senate.
Responsible hunting could be replaced by responsible farming of plants and ANIMALS for consumption. If you need a gun to help you survive EVERYDAY, you probably already have a permit to carry or work a job that requires you to have a gun. I don't know of too many places that demand a gun to remain safe today in AMERICA. Perhaps some of these claims could come up with some examples of this dire necessity.
Dawgfan...
Okay, of those 33,000 deaths caused by autos, how many of them were caused by the driver of the car intentionally trying to kill someone? 500? 1,000? I'll wager it's less than that.
Good try, though!
Devil - "look at the alternatives! Either we go back to the wild west,"
We have the alternative currently and while there are some problems, there will always be problems when you have free will and a free society, I say look at the alternatives to free will and a free society.
Regulating already law abiding citizens doesn't solve and problems.
For example "estimated 10,228 people who died in drunk driving crashes, accounting for 31% of all traffic deaths last year"
Based on you solution to gun violence, would be to ban certain types of alcohol and for the others some sort of test given prior to selling it. (Wait we tried that, how did that work out again)
Something has to be done about mental illness but that doesn't mean gun laws are going to help.
and FYI I have the right to own a gun without the federal government knowing about it as long as I am not breaking and laws. (By the way I don't even own guy)
http://www.centurycouncil.org/drunk-driving/drunk-driving-fatalities-national-statistics
Devil - "Okay, of those 33,000 deaths caused by autos, how many of them were caused by the driver of the car intentionally trying to kill someone?"
I would saying roughly 10,228 were intentional, if you drink and drive you know what could happen.
Beth,
It does matter. The number 1 calibur used in murders across the country is the .38 special. A round normally found in 5 or 6 shot revolvers. Just by mentioning that the AR-15 is the largest selling rifle in the country, yet only makes up less than 2% of all murders means it's not a weapon that should be banned from the country.
I love this statement. It's used by liberals all the time. The majority of guns used in this country to commit crimes or murder are obtained through straw purchase or bought illegally. As with the CO shooter and Virginia Tech shooter they lied on the federal form about the intended use of the firearms. Planning a massacure is not an acceptable answer on that form so they put something like recreation use or defense which was not their intentions. That lie makes it an illegal purchase. Guns being stolen from a home or auto-mobile is a completely different subject. There is not enough security in this world to protect guns from being stolen. I know that, but it doesn't stop me from trying to protect my weapons. I just finished building a 6,000 sq ft house, and with that I had all doors and door frames installed made out of steel. The house is brick on all sides, so the only access point would be windows. Well I have security camera's setup to view the entire surrounding of the house and recorded and kept for 60 days. Inside I have a room specially built. Steel reinforced concrete room (floor, walls, and ceiling) with ventilation system and steel door with biometric and numeric entry. I keep three 1,200 lbs safes with biometric and numeric locks in there to house my firearms and ammo plus re-loading equipment to make my ammo. Even with all of that I know that it's still possible for my firearms to be stolen.
Dawg, none of you stuff will ever be stolen with that set up. I don't argue with the likes of Beth, she is ingorant, anti-gun, and "nothing matters" except her viewpoint. I hope she never has a home invasion, time to pee pee in her pants......
Devil,
Drunk Driving Deaths
1991-15,827
1992-14,049
1993-13,739
1994-13,390
1995-13,478
1996-13,451
1997-12,757
1998-12,546
1999-12,555
2000-13,324
2001-13,290
2002-13,472
2003-13,096
2004-13,099
2005-13,582
2006-13,491
2007-13,041
2008-11,711
2009-10,759
2010-10,228
2011-9,878
Murder by firearms
2003-11,569
2004-11,344
2005-10,100
2006-10,177
2007-10,086
2008-9,484
2009-9,146
2010-8,775
2011-8,583
So looking at these numbers, it's safer to be around firearms than it is to be around cars. Both involve the illegal end use of the product. There are something like 100 million more firearms in this country than cars, so statistically speaking cars are more dangerous.
Quick, let's ban camouflage stuff !!!!!!!!!
Dawgfan - there's a difference between murder and negligence/accidents. Guns are used in 68% of the murders in the US - why? Because they are efficient and deadly - made that way intentionally. Guns are the #1 choice of suicides because they are the most effective. PLus, most suicide by gun is by using someone ELSE's gun in the home.
The problem here is people afraid that the "gummint" is going to take away your guns. It will not.
All laws place the responsibility on the person. Yes, people will speed despite speed limits. But lower speed limits saved lives and no one is going to take away your "speed" by limiting it.
Gun control is the same way. No one is taking your guns away, for us legal folk it may be more inconvenient, but we choose to follow the law. For criminals, they'll do what they do. But in the end, through responsibility, safety and conscious effort - gun deaths will go down.
If you're afraid the government will take your guns away, maybe there's a reason they should.
Dawg, your logic is flawed. You cannot compare number of cars to number of guns. If you want to do that, then cars are equal to guns, because cars just sit there, as do guns. How about instead we look at number of car deaths per million miles driven. This number was 1.27 deaths per million miles in 2008 (Wikipedia). It also comments that deaths per million miles driven has declined by a factor of 17 between 1920 and 2000. Now there are a lot more cars out there today and a lot more miles driven, yet very few deaths occur, and are becoming less and less. I challenge you to find me any reliable statistic that shows how gun deaths are decreasing in a similar fashion in this country. I suspect you would find dramatic increases in the number of gun deaths in that same period of 1920 to 2000. I'm no statistician, but if you could find a way to logically compare gun deaths to car deaths, I'm sure you would see that cars are much safer.
Try another argument, and this time have it make a little sense.
AN AR-15 IS NOT AN ASSAULT WEAPON!!! I get so tired of hearing this over and over.. It's a semi automatic rifle.. Assault weapons can only be bought legally by the military and the police without a very long permit process that is nearly impossible to obtain. An AR-15 is no more dangerous than any other semi automatic gun. Because it's black and looks tough that is supposed to make it more dangerous? I've got nothing against making clips smaller and making sure the person buying any gun is responsible but stop hanging incorrect tags on guns for the way they look. I would say that yes a person that was already looking to do such an evil deed would gravitate toward a gun that might look tougher or fancier just for the fact that it does.. A person looking to street race isn't going to shop for a Yugo...
A. I never said it should be banned. Where did you get that? Oh yes, out of what YOU wanted to hear.
B. It does NOT matter in the context of the posts. The point the OP was trying to make was that this was some big "conspiracy" and that it was too much of a "coincidence" that an AR 15 would be on the crime scene. I simply pointed out that statistically speaking, not so much of a "coincidence". But you knew that ... it just didn't support whatever point you were trying to hijack my post to make.
Okay, Dawgfan and Tom - Plymouth....
You both believe that causing a deadly accident (accidents are just that, accidents....FYI) while intoxicated is equivalent to murdering people (with the INTENT to kill) with a firearm, correct?
What if I was in the woods beside my house, on my own property, and Ted Nugent was on the other side of the woods, shooting at a dim-witted deer (there's a sport, eh?). His shot hits me in the head and kills me. By your own logic, he did it willfully and with malice and forethought, knowing full well there may be someone in the woods that would be shot. Now, you both know he didn't do it intentionally (whereas, murderous nutjobs with guns shooting up schoolchildren do it willfully).
I still would love to know how many cars were used as a weapon to intentionally kill someone. And compare that to the number of cold-blooded murders with guns as the weapon. Neither of you can argue against that data, I can promise you.
This story will be made into a horror movie in a few years. A young, unsuspecting family moves into the house and suddenly strange, paranormal events start to take place. Later, the family learns about the murders, but by then it's too late. Oh, and the movie trailer can boast how it's "based on true story."
Believe we've already seen this movie, over and over, beginning in the later 1970s.
Not as if the current crop of chromosome y brain defectives - or their predecessors - are rocket scientists. It would be best if men in Hollyweird would stop enabling and cheerleading and getting rich off the craziest males among us ... and their victims.
There are millions of people in the world, who watch these types of movies. Most of them young men or young men with their dates. Few of them commit violent crimes. Same goes with violent video games. Most people can make the distinction between fantasy and reality.
Personally, I love horror movies, but not the "torture" or "bloody" ones so much as they're not really scary. I just love the adrenaline rush of watching a truly scary movie or reading a scary book (don't be outlawing books, now...).
Kris, The same argument can be used for guns, There are hundreds of millions of legally owned guns in this country and only a few nuts commit violent crimes like this.
LITPB - I would agree with you about guns. It's not just "nuts" I worry about, but criminals with weapons, as well. Some "nuts" are harmless and wouldn't know what to do with a gun if they had one. I just can't determine which "nut" is harmful and which is not. I do know that if I lived with someone who was violence-prone, I would certainly not allow access to a gun and try to get medical assistance for that person. I don't know what Adam Lanza's mom was thinking. I guess she thought she could handle him by herself and thought he didn't need medical help. There is a stigma to getting mental health assistance and I guess she didn't want him to go through that. Extremely bad judgment on her part. She should have, at least, not allowed him to have access to guns. At all.
I am not objecting to having a gun for the purpose of self-defense. However, assault weapons with multi-round clips and having an arsenal of weapons are going a little overboard to me. If your house is under attack by a gang or zombies (jk), you'd have to have more than one person in the home or have multiple hands to fire them all. The criminals would be in your house before you could grab, load and shoot them all. Not to mention the fact that the criminals might have guns, including assault weapons, as well.
We have a gun (one) for self-defense, but it's not an assault weapon. I have nothing against legal hunting, if that's what you need to feel manly. I'd rather just look at a deer or elk in the wild and feel that they deserve to live their little lives, as short as they are. If I had to, I would hunt, but I don't have to. I can go to the grocery store or meat market for meat and don't particularly care for deer meat. I'd just as soon shoot at clay pigeons.
and
Try to comprehend those statements people.
Way to go NBC, trying to change from "spin baby spin" to " stir baby stir" perhaps?
Sir, if you go to Foxnews, they use the same article. It is not just MSNBC.
IA - You're spot-on! This is just another example of the liberal media types using a tragedy to push their agenda. They like to use buzz words with negative conotations to spin it to fit their gun-control ideology. They just have to figure out a way to work in that word "assault", huh?
Farshs- I took your challenge and went over to Fox and read their story. It's NOT the same copy and NOT ONCE did Fox's story use the word "assault". Typical liberal. Not afraid to lie to win an argument.
Daddio927, I'm currently looking at the Fox News version of this story, and they didn't use assault, but they did use the term "semi-automatic military-style rifle". And if you actually read this story instead of fuming the second you saw "assault" you'd know that the the term was used in a quote, from the Sherrif, MSN didn't use that term.
“The victims all had multiple gunshot wounds, and there appeared to be multiple weapons, including an assault-type weapon,” Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department deputy Aaron Williamson told Reuters.
So will you just calm down already.
My bad. I read it last night. Here is the actual word "
Authorities said each victim suffered more than one gunshot wound, and several guns were found at the home, one of which was a semi-automatic military-style rifle. Investigators were trying to determine who owned the guns
Read more: #ixzz2IcsQauVD
I assume in the house where the killing occured is "near the scene of shooting" and since I dont know guns, I thought "a semi-automatic military style rifle" means "assult-type weapon" are the same thing. My apology for being ignorance in guns.
Any gun used in a violent "assault" is an "assault weapon." Therefore, if stabbed with a No. 2 pencil, the pencil could be considered an "assault weapon," because it was used to assault someone or something. That does not have anything to do with magazines, long guns, AR's, carry permits, nothing. What will trying to ban a certain type of weapon do to create peace? Nothing. If you put a loaded AR-15 in a room full of people and set it on the table, how many people die? None, because the gun by itself cannot kill. A human being picks it up, aims it with intent to harm, then proceeds to harm others. So what is the real danger, guns made out of metal or the people made of hatred that pick them up. My guns are in a safe in my home and they have never escaped and "assaulted" anyone. Lets get our priorities straight people. STOP KILLING EACH OTHER!
So basically it is the sheriff's deputy who decided to fan the flames of hysteria/hype by calling out one model of rifle found at the scene - for no apparent reason other than stirring the pot.
A 15 year old nut killed his family. He used several guns. If the guns had not been the available weapon I suspect he would have used another method.
Well, Jwright, in the universe of infinite possibilities in answering hypothetical questions, yours is certainly one.
Teen troubles are timeless. The media attention to gore and drama only promotes more violence. I blame all the news people in the world for perpetuating violence for profit......
Its only a matter of time before someone walks into a public place and blows himself up, a daily occurence in some parts of the world already....
It seems to be happening at least weekly in this country lately.
Mr. Daddio927, here is from Foxnews word by word :
"All of the victims appeared to have been shot multiple times," Aaron Williamson, spokesman for the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department, told FoxNews.com. He said multiple weapons were found in the house, including an "AR type" assault rifle which Griego is alleged to have used in the rampage.
Read more: #ixzz2IeInkHXf
Slowly, the sheriff is telling more or slowly is Foxnews telling the truth due to their obligation to NRA. Statement was made by the same sheriff department spokeperson Mr. Williamson. May be MSNBC paid off Mr. Williamson (a conspiracy for you to chew on) to tell more detail earlier than for Foxnews. One more thing I have to apologize. Foxnews used "assult rifle" not like MSNBC used "assult weapon". In my world, I think rifle is weapon but sir you can educate me. One thing you are right, it is spin baby spin or stir baby stir. It goes round and round but the truth is still the truth.
So, we know what guns and attire were involved. Lets find out what medications were involved and make that public as well.
If this 15-year-old teenaged boy was on something, his dosage wasn't near enough. More likely his grades stunk and he lost cell phone privileges or was caught sneaking out at night, or didn't get the $150 Nikes he wanted for Christmas.
Why do so many of these guys need meds to begin with?
Yeah right, don't hold your breath waiting for that to come out. Med control laws are so strict in this country that you can't buy pills that would lead to suicidal (homicidal) thoughts, loss of consciousness, delirium or death.
no no no!!!! we cant mix "legal" big pharma mind poison into the disarming agenda.thats not part of the plan.its the icky bad gun.not the poisons that parents and doctors push on any kid at any age for any reason.
People really need to be reminded again and again that if you have a mentally sicked kids, you need to get rid of all kind of weapons from your house.
SSRI's anyone? Why is this not part of any of the current disussions?
gone4now..... are you kidding me??? Med control laws so strict??? What exactly are you on? Because teens and adults have easy access to prescription drugs in this country. Either they are prescribed too easily or they buy them illegally. And they do cause deaths, too many deaths. You just don't hear about on the news because it is kept quiet.
Being prescribed the proper meds, proper doses, and proper combinations of meds is a completely different discussion.
Everyone wants to blame medication and mental illness. Ya know, they show a lot more violence and crime on T V now, no matter what time of day or night, it is shown in some type of form. Also, you walk into a video store, and 90 % of what you see is war, assassinations, etc. A child, teen or adult can watch, see, or play the before mentioned and get lots of ideas of how and what they can do if and when the time comes they feel the need to do so. Also, what they are seeing or playing involves what ? GUNS They think it is the best way to deal with the situation when they start simply (not liking Mr. John Doe). Also the easiest way. They need to "take all violence off of T V, ban video games containg violence, and ban assault weapons.
Karen, if it's the fault of TV, why has the homicide rate been decreasing for the past 20 years?
And how will "banning assault weapons" help when "assault weapons" are used in fewer than 3 percent of all murders?
Karen, everyone wants to have SOMETHING to blame it on other than the person themselves. There are millions of people in this country who own guns. Millions more who are on some form of medication or another for stress, depression, neurological disorders.
And only a few mass killers. Horrific as these murders are, they say more about the PERSON, than the gun or the medication they are using. We need to stop making excuses for what a person does, and BLAME the person alone.
Unfortunately we are in the era of "It's not my fault". There's always someone/something else to blame.
We have sick people in our society, and it will always be that way. I'm sure when all the details come out, there will have been warning signals that were ignored. To bad these people can't be identified before these type of tragedies occur, and given the help they need. Unfortunately this person needs to be locked up forever to protect society.
My condolences to the family.
You are correct, there were signals...but not having guns in that house would most likely prevent this tragedy. People want rights to own guns...but a lot of them are just too stupid to have the right. Having all these guns and not securing them properly should be a crime of itself.
Sorry, The report said an AR-15 was found near the scene. Did the 15 year old use the rifle? How long before we hear that an AR type rifle was some where in the county? What drugs or other issues were there that pushed a kid to murder his family? The rifle, if it was used did not cause the murder. No more than the shoes the kid wore caused him to walk away from the scene. What went wrong within the family? What signs were missed? What drugs was the kid on or supposed to be on?
@beadarg...that's doubtful. Do you know how easy it would be for the kid to just wait til his parents are asleep and then bash them in the head with a bat or tire iron or another common household item like those? Before they could even make out what was happening they would be dead or at least unconscious. Once the parent's were taken care of, the smaller children would be no problem.
There are plenty of non-gun related ways he could have killed his family. Most murders are going to be doable without guns...and that's using the assumption that criminals won't have access to guns if there is a ban (which is laughable at best).
I'm sure that, somehow, the NRA will be blamed for causing this!
Our society has gone crazy! No amount of gun control can fix what is wrong. The problem is not guns.
We have our priorities all screwed up. Look at the news. Look at what the media is pushing. Wake up!
Ya, if only all the family members had been armed too. WyattEarp... sounds appropriate, he solved all his problems with a gun also.
Guns are not the only problem but one of the elements of gun killings. Just like fire. It needs three elements : fuel, oxygen and ignition. Miss any one of them will not lead to fire. Guns can be fuel, can be oxygen, can be ignition. Take it away and there would be no fire = no gun killing. Why people still arguing about hand guns are as deadly as assult rifles ? Killing is killing. Death is Death !!! Until one day their love one get killed, these people will never know the hurt because it is not their pain. They will insist "Fxxk the others as long as I have my guns !!! " Is this one of the "entitlements" which right wing republicans/gun lovers has been complaining about America ?
Why don't we focus on the real problem in America? There have been, an average
of four (4), of these crimes per year since l966-2010....but since 2010
the number has increased slightly. However, it is not the guns...it is
the mental stability, ability or diseased functions of the brain brought
about by parents, injury, schools, community, country and/or culture.
Guns have become more violent vicious and more numerous...yet, the
average has been steady until post 2010. Cars, buses and trains have
killed thousands. Alcohol and drugs thousands more. And, certainly
since l966 wars have too. But the one thing that remains constant is
our inability to deal with what causes the brain to break. What is the
physical, emotional or condition of the psyche that leads a young person
or older to do this? What have we given our boys since about l960 in
"drug" therapy that might also add to this? But, no! The progressives
aka democrats nee marxists want citizens to have no guns...so as Rahm
Emanuel himself said: don't let a good crisis go to waste..." even better when
it involves little kids. And Obama appoints the one real dog in the
group that is so sullied by ideology and hatemongering, that there will
be a hard push to accomplish what they tried for decades. Not to
mention that the progressive media will be led and prodded to do what
they are told....watch Diane Sawyer to get a drift. So....let us not
look into the "why" of the thing...let us leave the rest of the young
children and adults to harbor those types among them...let us pretend
that when we have gotten rid of some or maybe all firearms there will be
no more mass killings....until the next one with bombs, knives, illegal
chemicals, cars, trucks or illegal guns! Who are we and they kidding?
Farshs - tell that to the dudes in China who run into classroom with butcher knives and hack all the kids to death. It's so bad they're teaching little children to defend themselves with brooms! Imagine living in constant fear like that. It's sad.
I am waiting for some NRA nut to come up with another conspiracy theory on this horrific incident. Could it possibly be the case if there had not been an assault weapon in the home this never would have happened????!!!!! And you say the problem is not guns. BS at its best. Guns are not the entire problem but they are certainly a big part of our violent society.
Gone4now, if you read the news correctly. None of those chinese kids died during the stabbling. In your word, we should teach kids to use guns to defend themselves ? As I last check, mental instabilities of kids are being blamed as the main reason for this gun killings. Which side should people stand on. Teach kids to defend or cure kids with mental issues ? By the way, the "dude" in china used "knives" because there were no "guns". The 'dude with knives' can be overcome much easier than the "dude with guns".
I've seen research that says statistically you are less safe owning guns than you are if you don't. This would seem to be another example.
Why would any sane, rational person think that doing something like this would be acceptable for any reason? Something like this, or Newtown, or Aurora, or any one of the other horrific events that have occurred should be unthinkable in a truly civilized society. The fact that they are happening should be conclusive evidence of something very seriously wrong. Guns are not causing these things. Guns are merely the tools that are being misused to carry them out. The causes are much more complicated.
It's time to attack the cause of the disease, not the symptoms.
Why don't we ever see drug test results on the people who commit these crimes. Are they afraid they might have found MJ in there system? Just saying! All we ever hear about are the guns. How about some real journalism for a change, or are you afraid you would loose your job?
MJ is still considered dope and it effects people in different ways, some passive, some aggressive, but one thing for sure, it does distort reality, just like any drug including alcohol. I guess CA will be one of the first test States.
Look at the things that this society and the media think are interesting and important. A lying, cheating millionaire bicycle rider, a college football player with an imaginary girlfriend, Honey Boo Boo, the Kardshians. Come on people, you don't think there is anything wrong with this society? Are these the people that are electing our leaders? Why yes they are! Do I want the leaders that these fools elect making decisions about my finances, how to protect our children or what kind of a gun I can have? No, I don't think so.
This country is in serious trouble and if you don't realize it, you are part of the problem. It ain't the guns, folks.
@ a---rand
You are bringing MJ into this? OMG The prescription drugs you are taking need to be adjusted or stopped immediatly. Is there not one person on this board who doesn't see what DR's & drug companies are feeding people daily, and LEGALLY!!!! Just listen closely to the deppresion drug commercials. Not only them, just listen to the sleep aid commercials too. I think psychologists and mental health providers have messed up many, many peoples lives by their actions. Their prescription always is you need this drug to help you, overcome your issues. So introducing more possible mental issues to fix the current mental issues is progress? I have rheumatoid arthritis, and my DR has been working me over the coals to get on injectable disease modifiers. I have enough problems without introducing MORE possible side effects. Better get this countries mental health straight or this will countinuee no matter what
It's Obama's fault!
Or a "Bush" master.
Yep the gun nuts thinks that Obama has contracted out all these mass murders and serial killings.
They also think that Chicago is a country and Switzerland is a city.
if you keep a AR15 in your household, you are 100 times likely you will be killed by it.
Than shooting a intruder or aiding in the take over of a tyrannical government.
Facts.
Stats please, where did they come from, who did the study? In actual fact, HAMMERS, are responsible for more death in the USA than guns!! Check it out yourselves.
I doubt it is 100%, there is that 1 time in a million where you would be proven wrong.
However, I get what you are saying.
I would never be stupid enough to be killed by one of my own guns. So your stats are incorrect. Next, please?
How come then I's still alive and I had my AR15 for over 12 years? And also how will I be killed by it? I've cleaned it and also left it on the counter to go get somethings out of my room and I even left it in the bed of the truck with a full magazine in it when we were out shooting and it never once tried to shoot me, so I would like to know How it's going to do me harm?
I've had an AR-15 for nearly forty years. Is my rifle defective? Should I contact Colt and ask why it hasen't jumped off the rack and shot everyone in the house?
Using an AR-15 to stop a tryannical government might have been a powerful weapon in 1776, but using that against the present government would about as effective as a cap pistol.
If some nuts did decide to rise up against the government they would be vaporized by some military operator sitting in an under ground bunker in North Dakota or some other remote area out of the way using a drone to drop a depleted uranium shell in their hip pockets using their cell phone as a honing device.
tonyp1454
THANK YOU
John pretty much nailed it. You're fooling yourself if you think owning a few guns is going to protect you from our government should they choose to turn "tyrannical".
tony
You are F.O.S.
90% of online FACTS are made up on the spot.
Tony, I'd like to the stats on your speculations.
When guns can get up off the table or out of the drawer, aim and fire at you, THEN I will blame the guns.
Until then I blame the person firing it.
John Nettles wrote:
"Using an AR-15 to stop a tryannical government might have been a powerful weapon in 1776, but using that against the present government would about as effective as a cap pistol.
If some nuts did decide to rise up against the government they would be vaporized by some military operator sitting in an under ground bunker in North Dakota or some other remote area out of the way using a drone to drop a depleted uranium shell in their hip pockets using their cell phone as a honing device."
John, that's an argument that some anti-gun people like to use and it's completely inane. Yeah right, the government will use nuclear weapons against it's own citizens. If you were smart enough to know some history you would know that wouldn't happen.
No country has used weapons like that against it's own citizens. For one thing, there would be international outrage and steps would be taken to stop this murderous government. Russia, China and North Korea have never used weapons like that on their own people. Russia could have wiped out Afghanistan and Chechnya if they wanted to by using WMD's and they didn't. The USA could do the same thing in the Mideast and they don't because of the international community.
When the USSR fell and Yugoslavia broke up, Slovenia was the first country to declare independence from the former Yugoslavia. It's a small country of 2 million people. Serbia sent in their military to try and stop them and it didn't work even though they could have easily rolled over them. It didn't work because Serbia was afraid of what would happen to them from the international community if they had sent in their entire army using full force against them.
Also, do you really think the USA military would actually have anyone that would use weapons like that against their family, friends, neighbors and fellow countrymen?
You, and people who share your view, are obtuse to what would happen if there was a revolution in this country.
Roodles,do you remember Kent State,do you remember when Mcarther took the troops to the park in I believe it was DC and used them on those veterans,do you remember Waco,please do not fool yourself into believing that there are not military people that would hesitate one minute to kill their own people.
I know all about MacArthur & Patton & the Bonus Army. Different times now. Consider Vietnam and fragging officers.
I know a fair number of military who would rather kill a few politicians than the civilians they were ordered to shoot.
Good thing they mentioned that an "AR-15 style" rifle (whatever that means) was one of the weapons found "near" the scene. The general public might get the idea that people can be murdered with something other than an "assault type" weapon.
My sincere sympathies to the victim's family and friends.
Interesting that the news story would tell us that one of the guns was:
MSNBC "an AR15 style rifle"
FOX " a military style rifle"
And yet they don't list what the other guns were.
Add to that the fact that we aren't being which gun(s) were actually used and I suspect someone is trying to lead us into jumping conclusions before we have all of the facts.
There many weapons, but only call out the AK47? What else did this sick kid use on whom and how? But, hey if you're a prog, the truth is something you don't want to report!
I think there caliing out the AR-15 again
Sue, they didn't say that the deaths were caused by using the AR15, just that it was there in the house.
That's like the "assault rifle" found in the trunk of the car the shooter used in the CT case.
Way to go Dad. You really kept those weapons secured in a locked safe. Oh, you were too cheap to buy a safe? Bang bang you lose.
There we go AGAIN !!!!
Right wing gun nuts MUST be institutionalized !!!! They suffer from PARANOIA and paranoia is a mental illness !!!
All of these mass murders ARE comminted by people that has no criminal past !!!!
BAN ALL ASSAULT WEAPONS !!!
As a european I am appalled at all these crimes that would not happen if most weapons were outlawed !!
The constitution IS OUTDATED !! It does not fit with the 21st century. I have no doubts the forefarthers would have banned those assault weapons.
Well how about you just worry about whats going on in your country, and don't worry about whats going on here. And if you don't like us americans with guns, heres a simple solution dont come over here.
Thank you for your input (as a European). As Americans, we don't give a SH1t if you are appalled or not.
@american
sure , thats one way too look at it, but denial of whats really going on with our youth is far more disturbing.
Hey Euro fool,
Suck it
The 5 Worst/Recent Mass Murders in the USA (with a Firearm) Came from Democrats
By Clash Daily / 18 January 2013 / 291 Comments
The source of information for this news post came from Roger Hedgecock's 1/17/13 radio show. Here's the link. Fast forward to 21:13 for Roger's comments.
The five worst mass killings, where a firearm was used, have a common thread. Hint #1: They didn't belong to the NRA. They don't fit the stereotype of the "red-neck" gun owner.
Check it out …
Ft Hood: Registered Democrat/Muslim.
Columbine: Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals.
Virginia Tech: Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff.
Colorado Theater: Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal.
Connecticut School Shooter: Registered Democrat; hated Christians.
Common thread is that all of these shooters were progressive liberal Democrats.
Also, of the worst killings in the last several decades, only one was a female, all the rest were boys, barely men. Their role models were rappers, action movies, comics and violent video games.
Our problem isn't weapons, it's boys without boundaries. Who live in 'progressive' households.
- via Macho Slavich [facebook] h/t S. A. Lachut
Read more: #ixzz2IdSkxTC2
Get more Clash on ClashDaily.com, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
F@#% YOU EURO TRASH
Eurotrash, if the US Constitution is "outdated" and you think it should be changed, why don't you and your Eurotrash buddies come over here and change it?
Why are killings by rifles (including so-called "assault" rifles) considered a crisis? More people are killed by clubs, baseball bats and blunt instruments than all rifles.
In 2010, 358 deaths nation-wide from rifles. In 2011, 353 deaths from rifles. 64% of total deaths from guns were suicides, with only 36% of deaths homicides---the vast majority of which were from handguns. If you don't believe me, feel free to Google the FBI statistics on fbi.gov.
Of the 36% of deaths that were homicides, some were police shooting criminals, some were citizens shooting criminals and a HUGE number are criminals killing people over drugs. Want to shrink gun violence dramatically? Decriminalize drugs!
Little fact, the Fire Arms Act of 1934 (which banned many guns, including fully-automatic machine guns) was mainly created to deal with "gangster" weapons... a problem created by the previous GOVERNMENT banning of alcohol known as "Prohibition", which lead to gangsterism.
Now, once again, the government looks to restricting rights (in this case rights to have NON-fully-automatic guns) instead of seeing how their banning of drugs is responsible for creating the modern-day gangstas doing most of the killing.
You can always depend on the liberal pieces of sh*t like Obama to exploit a few dead children as an excuse to restrict 2nd Amendment rights, just as you could depend on the conservative pieces of sh*t like George W Bush to use the Americans killed on 9-11 to restrict the 4th Amendment rights.
Pastor of a church with assault weapons in his house. Not likely a 15 year old was able to buy these so dad must have. Did they keep him safe? Why do so many religious people feel the need to have guns? Where does faith in God fit in to this?. I guess it's good to have a gun just in case God is busy taking care of business in another galaxy
This story didn't say that he had assault weapons in his house. This story didn't even say that the pastor OWNED guns. What this story said is that "multiple weapons" (doesn't say guns, just weapons) were recovered. The story also says that an "assault style" (that's media-speak for anything that doesnt look like a Daisy Red Rider) rifle was found "near the scene". Just like a good little liberal lemming, you have utterly failed in the area of critical thinking. Just swallow the liberal media hype hook, line and sinker and don't think for yourself, right?
If multiple guns were found in the house, they didn't just walk in there. The father had to know about his son's problems. Some of the guns were most likely owned by the father or other family member!
;~(
Dear NRA,
Since it's true, like you say, that America needs more guns so we can be safe, and since it's true that there are already 300 million guns in America, wouldn't we already be the safest country in the world?
How many more guns do we need until we can feel safe?
Should we all be wearing body armor and carrying assault weapons?
Does that sound like America? No, it sounds more like Mogadishu.
Dear Liberal and Conservative STATIST morons,
Why don't you decriminalize drugs because we all know PROHIBITION of the drug known as "alcohol" didn't work, and maybe the violence caused by the modern Al Capones would be shrunk.
P.S. End the Patriot Act and stop trying to clamp down on guns. If you can't afford toilet paper, I can buy you some so that you will stop wiping your a$$es on the 2nd and 4th Amendments.
the breakdown of society and the family value.
no god, no morals, no respect, no boundaries
No God? This kids father was a preacher
follow the rest.....no morals, no respect and no boundaries.
maybe this guy was promoting the wrong god.
What is "AR15-style?"
FWIW, the article did not state the rifle was used in the killings, but that there were "multiple weapons."
Anyway, this all goes back to what I've been preaching: keep your guns locked up or secured in some manner. The shooter is 15, and there is a federal law requiring gun owners to keep their guns out of the hands of children.
I think it should be a law that covers more than just keeping your guns from children, but to keep all weapons not under physical control of the owner to be secured, locked up, whatever it takes. That's the only gun control law that makes sense to me.
Probably was a Bushmaster. The problem I've always seen with guns + kids is that if you lock them up they can't be retrieved fast in case of home invasion. When my 1st child started walking I got rid of all my guns and since then I've learned what a burden it is to carry one anyway. I had my first ccw in 1972 and carried a .357 for years, lived in L.A. - turned out that I never needed it. I don't have a problem with people having them or carrying them, it just bothers me that there are so many of them out there. I see people every day driving like lunatics and getting into shouting matches with other drivers over petty stuff, and I wonder how many of them are packing. Too many guns.
I see your point.
My opinion is any owner who intends to have a firearm ready for protection should have physical control of the weapon. All other firearms would be locked in a gunsafe. Example: a shotgun hidden in the bedroom closet when the owner is out in the garage and his kids are in the backyard is not under the owner's physical control.
In my life, I've had only one occasion in public when I was glad to have a firearm for personal defense. But I guess it only takes once.
For home defense I've always believed a shotgun to be a good choice. Lately, I've been thinking more of getting a good crossbow for home defense, for the first (and hopefully the only) shot. An arrow or bolt is less likely to go through a wall and hit someone else, or cause damage to my home interior--and it is "quiet."
Amen, I hear all these stories of kids shooting up places or even the one where the police officer left a loaded gun with children in the car and think to myself that just a little responsibility could go a long way. If people kept the guns locked in gun safes the children would not have access to them. and if a person has a CWP and cannot take their gun into an establishment leave the gun in the car but take the magazine so there is no ammo. It's not the guns that are the problem it's that gun owners need to take personal responsibility to ensure public safety.
It's a mad world we live in. No real surprise here to read this. By the time I get off work today I bet there will be another story of some mentally ill person doing some harm onto others. At this point all you can hope is to not be a victim of violence. The argument will always loom about firearms and there are too many variables to have a clear cut answer.
A sane voice speaking to the insane, to bad nobdy is listening
if were me and i didnt have access to a banned gun or i just could not own a gun. i would have used 1 of perhaps 200 way to kill a person.
please think before you type, removing guns dont solve anything. just deal with it, people throughout time have killed others by other means.
removing guns to satisfy one side of the argument will just anger the other side, pushing your way through and creating anger doesnt help the cause.
do you know how many time bombs are out there...and they all have legal guns
There are 100 X more hardened criminals out there with illegal guns. An you can't say a gun was obtained legally by killing the owner.
That's because someone bought the gun legally. Criminals don't manufacture their guns, Smith & Wesson, Kruger, Colt, etc manufactured them. Get rid of "legal" guns and by attrition the illegal guns will disappear.
I know, way too logical for the gun nuts to understand.
Banned AR 15 not available, so if i were wanting to act out because i was stoned and just finished 12 hours of modern warfare, think i would go with two sharp machetes. if i ran into sandy hook with these two sharp machetes i could achieve a very high body count and unlock a new weapon on modern warfare.
If you were "stoned" then you probably wouldnt have the motivation to leave your house after 12 hours of Modern Warfare, but thanks for trolling.
Imagine no guns. John Lennon could have.
he also dreamed about us living in yellow submarines, too...