Texas Shooting

[Slipknot]

Another very sad day in our history.

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

To me anyway, this points out two problems that continue to contribute. First is clearly a troubled and possibly bullied teen who based on his search history probably could or should have been on somebody’s radar. I know the arguments for and against software to flag these types of internet and social media activity as an invasion of privacy, but if your searching past school shootings to fine turn your own, tough fing #^&#^&#^&#^&. Sad that we need that type of survilllence to flag these troubled teens but it might be time.take away more rights like the Patriot act if not going to solve the problem.

And yet again Dads weapons are used, so what about the parents culpability is these situations? Time for stricter laws on storage and stiff fines or prosecution for parents that allow their “good kids” to go on a killing spree with dads guns.
Pretty sure the parents did not "allow" their good kids to go on a killing spree. There already are storage laws, reaction to these things is to make them stricter. That is being defensive but it does NOT solve the problem.
If you think your little Johnny isn’t capable, just listen to any of the after interviews and shock that parents seem to have after their boys go bad.

You forgot the third point to make.
The media and society needs to stop trying to be first to get the killers name out there giving them their fame. How about a law infringing on the first Amendment that calls for all reference to the killer as murderer instead of their name. Maybe then these evil freaks will have less motivation since they won't get the notoriety. Something to think about anyway. I don't have the answers to society's complicated problem here in America the land of the free and home of the brave.

[Slipknot]

NOT A SINGLE LAW PROPOSED BY GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES WOULD HAVE PREVENTED SANTA FE...
By Kevin Ryan

...but stronger school security may have.

Almost immediately following the school shooting in Santa Fe last week, the media and gun control advocates once again began pushing the narrative that inadequate gun laws were responsible, and that stricter gun control would have prevented it. Few in the mainstream media bothered questioning that narrative. But a closer look reveals that not only is the narrative false, but also that proposals for stricter school security that many gun control advocates reject out of hand would have, in fact, helped prevent or mitigate the bloodshed.

GUN CONTROL POLICIES THAT WOULD HAVE HAD NO EFFECT ON THE SANTA FE SHOOTING

• “Assault rifle” ban - Neither weapon is considered an “assault rifle”.

• Semi-automatic firearm ban - Neither the shotgun nor the .38 revolver are semi-automatic firearms.

• Universal background checks a.k.a. “Gun show loophole” fix - Whether the weapons used were acquired from a private party or commercial seller is irrelevant, since the weapon’s buyer, the shooter’s father, would have passed a background check.

• Australian-style buyback - Both of the firearms used in the Santa Fe shooting were types that were exempt from the mandatory Australian gun buyback, and remain legal to purchase and possess today.

• “Extreme risk protection order” - Laws authorizing law enforcement agents to confiscate guns from individuals deemed to be a danger to themselves or others would have not stopped this attack, as there was little warning this particular boy was a danger. The gunman’s classmates and parents said they saw no signs of trouble before the shooting. And regardless, the firearms didn’t belong to him.

• Magazine capacity restrictions - Neither weapon utilizes magazines.

LAWS THAT WERE IN PLACE THAT WERE INEFFECTIVE, IGNORED, OR VIOLATED

• Age restriction on handgun possession - Federal law prohibits the possession of a handgun or handgun ammunition by any person under the age of 18. The shooter was 17.

• Handgun permit requirement - The shooter did not have a permit to carry a handgun as required under Texas law, since he is under the minimum age of 21.

• School firearm prohibition - State and federal law prohibits a student from carrying a firearm in school.

• Minimum shotgun barrel size law - Reports say the shotgun used by the shooter had a sawed-off barrel. Texas law requires that a shotgun must have a barrel length of 18 inches or more and an overall length of 26 inches or more.

• Explosive weapon ban - Explosive weapons, such as the pipe bombs that the attacker possessed, are illegal under state and federal laws.

PROPOSED LAWS/POLICIES THAT MAY HAVE HAD AN EFFECT IF THEY’D BEEN IN PLACE

• ”Child access prevention” (CAP) laws - CAP laws are laws that hold gun owners, such as the shooter’s father, accountable for the safe storage of firearms, imposing liability for failing to prevent guns from falling into young hands. Texas DID have such a law in place, but it applied to children under the age of 17. Since the shooter was just over 17, it’s unlikely his father will be criminally liable. If the law had applied to children under 18, perhaps the father would have taken measures to more adequately secure his firearms. However, it’s unknown how the boy gained access to them, but reports indicate the family says the weapons were stored in a locked safe. If true, CAP laws were followed yet failed to prevent the tragedy.

• Armed teachers - Texas has a school marshal program which allows for teachers and staff to be trained to conceal carry firearms in school. Over 170 school districts take part, and last November Santa Fe also signed up. Unfortunately the high school had yet to implement the program and was still working out the details.

• Stronger entry security - Several government officials have stated that schools should implement stronger entry security, reduce the number of entryways, and utilize metal detectors to prevent weapons from being brought into schools. Santa Fe High School did not have metal detectors.

LAWS/POLICIES THAT WERE IN EFFECT AND LIKELY PREVENTED FURTHER BLOODSHED

• Armed school resource officers - Santa Fe High School had 2 armed police officers patrolling the school. The gunman shot one who approached him, then talked with the other, and eventually offered to surrender. Had there been no officers present, the shooting may have continued.