Australian baseball player killed by OK teens - just because

[frankq]

It is quite obvious that acquiring firearms was no challenge for these teens.
If it hadn't been so easy, and it had required a bit more effort for them to acquire their mode of mischief, they might have sought out some other form of entertainment.

They stole the weapons. What more can we tell you. You don't like guns....Ok...We get it. I guess the allure of the inanimate object on the human brain is just too much to handle. Yes...guns create evil.......fine....obviously these fine young children would never have done anything bad if not for the siren song of "the gun".

How about this. At least one of these kids has a record. Maybe if the judicial system would do it's job and stop handling these thugs like little kids, a lot less of this kind of shit would happen. You really want to know what would have prevented this? Maybe their fathers should have used a condom. Then for sure there wouldn't be a dead Ausse baseball player.....

[Tennesseer]

Aug 23, 2013 13:54:03 GMT -5 frankq said:

Aug 21, 2013 20:45:32 GMT -5 @patiencetried said:

 Three teens (all "minors") were bored... but they had a handgun.

 If they hadn't had a handgun, there would be one more Australian student in Oklahoma... alive.

 Spin THAT.

They also had a shotgun hidden in the car, weapons stolen or "procured" from the home of someone they knew....If you're going to say that this never would have happened if not for the "gun", you are mistaken. Evil will do evil in any way possible.

How about all gun owners really securing their weapons at home so no one can take them. Don't tell anyone in your house, family or friends, the combination to the locked gun safe unless that person has been properly trained in the handling of guns.  That would help.

Yesterday, here in town, a kindergarten student took a poorly secured gun from home, put it in his student backpack and took it to school.  In the school cafeteria, the boy dropped his backpack on the ground.  The gun went off.  Fortunately the bullet missed hitting anyone.

[Virgil Showlion]

Aug 23, 2013 14:54:09 GMT -5 frankq said:

It is quite obvious that acquiring firearms was no challenge for these teens.
If it hadn't been so easy, and it had required a bit more effort for them to acquire their mode of mischief, they might have sought out some other form of entertainment.

They stole the weapons. What more can we tell you. You don't like guns....Ok...We get it. I guess the allure of the inanimate object on the human brain is just too much to handle. Yes...guns create evil.......fine....obviously these fine young children would never have done anything bad if not for the siren song of "the gun".

How about this. At least one of these kids has a record. Maybe if the judicial system would do it's job and stop handling these thugs like little kids, a lot less of this kind of shit would happen. You really want to know what would have prevented this? Maybe their fathers should have used a condom. Then for sure there wouldn't be a dead Ausse baseball player.....

Guns increase an evil man's capacity for mayhem. That's billis et al.'s argument in a nutshell.

Why they care about the weapon used to perpetrate the attack more than they care about the attack itself, I don't know.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 23, 2013 15:08:32 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Aug 23, 2013 14:54:09 GMT -5 frankq said:

It is quite obvious that acquiring firearms was no challenge for these teens.
If it hadn't been so easy, and it had required a bit more effort for them to acquire their mode of mischief, they might have sought out some other form of entertainment.

They stole the weapons. What more can we tell you. You don't like guns....Ok...We get it. I guess the allure of the inanimate object on the human brain is just too much to handle. Yes...guns create evil.......fine....obviously these fine young children would never have done anything bad if not for the siren song of "the gun".

How about this. At least one of these kids has a record. Maybe if the judicial system would do it's job and stop handling these thugs like little kids, a lot less of this kind of shit would happen. You really want to know what would have prevented this? Maybe their fathers should have used a condom. Then for sure there wouldn't be a dead Ausse baseball player.....

Guns increase an evil man's capacity for mayhem. That's billis et al.'s argument in a nutshell.

Why they care about the weapon used to perpetrate the attack more than they care about the attack itself, I don't know.

i am not following you:

a) what makes you think we don't care about the attack?
b) what are you suggesting we should do about the "attack itself"?

[Virgil Showlion]

Aug 23, 2013 15:56:31 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Aug 23, 2013 15:08:32 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Guns increase an evil man's capacity for mayhem. That's billis et al.'s argument in a nutshell.

Why they care about the weapon used to perpetrate the attack more than they care about the attack itself, I don't know.

i am not following you:

a) what makes you think we don't care about the attack?
b) what are you suggesting we should do about the "attack itself"?

a) I didn't say you don't care about the attack. I said that you care more about the weapon used in the attack than the attack itself. I base this on the observation that more of your commentary in this thread pertains to the gun than to the victim, the shooters, or the circumstances of the crime. In billis' case, all of his commentary pertains to the gun.

b) I'm not suggesting you do anything. If you want Frank off your back, though, you might try acknowledging that the attack would have been perpetrated with or without the gun, and that it almost certainly would have been fatal with or without the gun.

It's the same issue that Tenn had with Zib. It's hard to concentrate on the tragedy itself when your opponent is determined to spin it into a defense for his/her thinly-related ideological viewpoint.

[Tennesseer]

Why should anyone acknowledge that the attack would have been perpetrated with or without a gun?  Cowards use guns as they can be shot from afar with little to no danger to the shooter.  Most other weapons would require an attack up close and personal and those don't always end in favor of the attacker depending upon the skills of the intended victim.

So no.  The attack may not have occurred if the killers didn't have a gun.  

[frankq]

So no. The attack may not have occurred if the killers didn't have a gun.

No...it would have. Because when you mix a couple of stupid, jagoff teenagers with no regard for life with too much idle time, you get tragedy. It's just a shame that this young baseball player didn't have a weapon to shoot these two wastes of human DNA that shot him. I hope these assholes do life of the harshest kind as cell block bitches, along with the asshole "kids" that beat that 89 year old WWII vet to death, and I hope every news network on the planet reports it that way so that every imbacile with an inkling to do something even remotely as bad and stupid thinks twice. One way to curb this kind of shit is to stop finding excuses for the actions of these people and stop making rock stars out of them on Court TV.

Tenn...

Check the stats on countries that have the strictest gun laws, then get back to me. Lets cut the shit and start making people responsible for their actions. Make murder a Federal offense with the death penalty. Take the states prerogative and bleeding heart liberal bullshit out of the equation. 

[Virgil Showlion]

Aug 23, 2013 16:32:02 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Why should anyone acknowledge that the attack would have been perpetrated with or without a gun?  Cowards use guns as they can be shot from afar with little to no danger to the shooter.  Most other weapons would require an attack up close and personal and those don't always end in favor of the attacker depending upon the skills of the intended victim.

So no.  The attack may not have occurred if the killers didn't have a gun.  

Mr. Lane wouldn't have died if he'd been wearing a bullet-proof vest. Yet nobody here is suggesting that everybody go out and buy a bullet-proof vest.

Why? Because it's an absurd overreaction to a random shooting. Nobody in their right mind would suggest something so radical in response to this incident.

Yet here we are debating how much less likely it is that Mr. Lane would've died had the killers not had a gun. How about: who on Earth cares? Unless you think banning all guns is a reasonable response to a random shooting. Why does the gun even matter? What I'd like to know is why they did it. What had they done up until that point? What are their parents like? Do they claim to be influenced by a particular ideology, or a particular video game, or literature? Is the killing gang-related?

[Tennesseer]

What else did your crystal tell you Frank?

[frankq]

It told me that you guys would have exactly the same response that you had. Based on your fear of a piece of metal that has irresistibly evil psychic properties and the ability to control the minds of anyone within visual range. Perhaps the answer is for everyone to wear a rosary with a cross to ward off the evil spirits of "the gun". Obviously it's guns that are responsible for crimes, people just can't help themselves.....

[frankq]

Yet here we are debating how much less likely it is that Mr. Lane would've died had the killers not had a gun. How about: who on Earth cares? Unless you think banning all guns is a reasonable response to a random shooting. Why does the gun even matter? What I'd like to know is why they did it. What had they done up until that point? What are their parents like? Do they claim to be influenced by a particular ideology, or a particular video game, or literature? Is the killing gang-related?

Virg, stop injecting rational thoughts into this discussion. WTF is wrong with you......IT'S GUNS!!!!!!!!! It's whatever they want it to be except somebody's own terrible choice. The gun made them do it.

[mmhmm]

Aug 23, 2013 15:08:32 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Aug 23, 2013 14:54:09 GMT -5 frankq said:

It is quite obvious that acquiring firearms was no challenge for these teens.
If it hadn't been so easy, and it had required a bit more effort for them to acquire their mode of mischief, they might have sought out some other form of entertainment.

They stole the weapons. What more can we tell you. You don't like guns....Ok...We get it. I guess the allure of the inanimate object on the human brain is just too much to handle. Yes...guns create evil.......fine....obviously these fine young children would never have done anything bad if not for the siren song of "the gun".

How about this. At least one of these kids has a record. Maybe if the judicial system would do it's job and stop handling these thugs like little kids, a lot less of this kind of shit would happen. You really want to know what would have prevented this? Maybe their fathers should have used a condom. Then for sure there wouldn't be a dead Ausse baseball player.....

Guns increase an evil man's capacity for mayhem. That's billis et al.'s argument in a nutshell.

Why they care about the weapon used to perpetrate the attack more than they care about the attack itself, I don't know.

Who has said they do, Virgil?  Nobody, that's who.  I'm sure we're all concerned about these murderous attacks.  I know I certainly am!

[frankq]

So no. The attack may not have occurred if the killers didn't have a gun.

Not the case for this 89 year old WWII vet....
usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/23/20145461-teen-charged-second-sought-in-beating-death-of-wwii-vet-88-in-spokane-wash?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=2

Yeah....the guns make all the difference.

[Tennesseer]

Aug 23, 2013 18:47:58 GMT -5 frankq said:

So no. The attack may not have occurred if the killers didn't have a gun.

Not the case for this 89 year old WWII vet....
usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/23/20145461-teen-charged-second-sought-in-beating-death-of-wwii-vet-88-in-spokane-wash?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=2

Yeah....the guns make all the difference.

What part of "may not have occurred" don't you understand?

And there is a slight physical condition difference between a 22 year old athlete and an 89 year old WWII vet.

ETA:  CORRECTION.  88 YEAR OLD MAN.

[billisonboard]

Aug 23, 2013 16:17:54 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

... In billis' case, all of his commentary pertains to the gun.
...

[mmhmm]

b) I'm not suggesting you do anything. If you want Frank off your back, though, you might try acknowledging that the attack would have been perpetrated with or without the gun, and that it almost certainly would have been fatal with or without the gun.

Nobody here can do that, Virgil.  We don't know what "would have" happened.  We know what did happen.  We can surmise what "could have" happened.  However, we do not know, and cannot know what "would have" happened.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 23, 2013 16:17:54 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Aug 23, 2013 15:56:31 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i am not following you:

a) what makes you think we don't care about the attack?
b) what are you suggesting we should do about the "attack itself"?

a) I didn't say you don't care about the attack. I said that you care more about the weapon used in the attack than the attack itself. I base this on the observation that more of your commentary in this thread pertains to the gun than to the victim, the shooters, or the circumstances of the crime. In billis' case, all of his commentary pertains to the gun.

b) I'm not suggesting you do anything. If you want Frank off your back, though, you might try acknowledging that the attack would have been perpetrated with or without the gun, and that it almost certainly would have been fatal with or without the gun.

i am not sure it would have.  i say this for two reasons.  the first is that the perps said "they wanted to go kill someone".  without the gun, it might have stopped right there.  having the means to do something has a lot to do with doing it.  i disagree with the second half as well.  a 21 year old athlete in good shape should be able to outrun three teenagers, at least, if not outwrestle them.  i don't think it is anything close to a forgone conclusion that he would have died- though if they were armed with something other than their fists, i would agree that it might be "probable".

It's the same issue that Tenn had with Zib. It's hard to concentrate on the tragedy itself when your opponent is determined to spin it into a defense for his/her thinly-related ideological viewpoint.

whatever.  i am not terribly interested in spin.  i am just not sure that any of these assertions were true.  but if you want to know, you could ask the perpetrators, i suppose.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 23, 2013 17:02:07 GMT -5 frankq said:

So no. The attack may not have occurred if the killers didn't have a gun.

No...it would have. Because when you mix a couple of stupid, jagoff teenagers with no regard for life with too much idle time, you get tragedy.

yes, you do.  but tragedy doesn't mean death, typically.  it typically means "gameboy", or "couch surfing".

[djAdvocate]

Aug 23, 2013 17:05:24 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Aug 23, 2013 16:32:02 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Why should anyone acknowledge that the attack would have been perpetrated with or without a gun?  Cowards use guns as they can be shot from afar with little to no danger to the shooter.  Most other weapons would require an attack up close and personal and those don't always end in favor of the attacker depending upon the skills of the intended victim.

So no.  The attack may not have occurred if the killers didn't have a gun.  

Mr. Lane wouldn't have died if he'd been wearing a bullet-proof vest. Yet nobody here is suggesting that everybody go out and buy a bullet-proof vest.

Why? Because it's an absurd overreaction to a random shooting. Nobody in their right mind would suggest something so radical in response to this incident.

Yet here we are debating how much less likely it is that Mr. Lane would've died had the killers not had a gun. How about: who on Earth cares? Unless you think banning all guns is a reasonable response to a random shooting.

really?  that is the ONLY response you can think of?

wow.

[frankq]

yes, you do. but tragedy doesn't mean death, typically. it typically means "gameboy", or "couch surfing".

Not quite understanding this post. Are you saying that without the gun these assholes would have just gone back home and played video games?

The problem is obvious and is systemic in our society. The focus is on the inanimate object more than the people that use it. Until that changes, there will always be more of this stuff happening.

[billisonboard]

Aug 24, 2013 8:33:54 GMT -5 frankq said:

...

The problem is obvious and is systemic in our society. The focus is on the inanimate object more than the people that use it. Until that changes, there will always be more of this stuff happening.

Did they arrest the gun and let the people who used it go free?

[frankq]

Did they arrest the gun and let the people who used it go free?

No......they haven't found the gun.....still on the loose....but be assured that there are people that will not rest until that gun is in custody and answering for it's crimes...

[billisonboard]

Aug 24, 2013 9:40:39 GMT -5 frankq said:

Did they arrest the gun and let the people who used it go free?

No......they haven't found the gun.....still on the loose....but be assured that there are people that will not rest until that gun is in custody and answering for it's crimes...

But will the people who used it go free?

[mmhmm]

Aug 24, 2013 8:33:54 GMT -5 frankq said:

yes, you do. but tragedy doesn't mean death, typically. it typically means "gameboy", or "couch surfing".

Not quite understanding this post. Are you saying that without the gun these assholes would have just gone back home and played video games?

The problem is obvious and is systemic in our society. The focus is on the inanimate object more than the people that use it. Until that changes, there will always be more of this stuff happening.

I don't think that's true, frankq, just as I don't believe the majority of those who want to see some controls put on gun ownership want to take guns away from everyone.  Are there those who do?  Yes, there probably are, but I don't think any of those post here.  People are looking for answers to the problem of random crimes like this one.  They see many of these as crimes of opportunity fostered by the ease of shooting someone from a distance as opposed to having to attack from a closer proximity.  There's no way anybody can say that's not an easier way of killing someone.  It is.  So, it's not that people are focusing on the gun.  They're focusing on the dead person who's death was caused by a gunshot.

Would these kids have killed if they didn't have that gun?  We don't know the answer to that - because, they DID have the gun.  People are just looking for answers and we all don't think alike (thank the stars!).  Because someone doesn't think as I do doesn't mean that person is dumb as a post and I have all the answers.  It also doesn't mean I'm dumb as a post and that person has all the answers.  It just means ... as I said ... we think differently and in casting about for an answer to something that appalls us, we come to different conclusions about what that answer might be.

These kids need to be under the jail, as far as I'm concerned.  Whatever the reason, at their ages they're warped - possibly beyond redemption.  I'm not one who believes this sort of person can be rehabilitated in most cases.  It's sad, and I'm sorry, but that's proven to be true.  There might be a way to turn these wastes of DNA into useful human beings, but we haven't found it yet.  In the meantime, when they do something like this we need to recognize they're a major danger to society and see that they don't have access to society.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 24, 2013 8:33:54 GMT -5 frankq said:

yes, you do. but tragedy doesn't mean death, typically. it typically means "gameboy", or "couch surfing".

Not quite understanding this post. Are you saying that without the gun these assholes would have just gone back home and played video games?

not exactly.  what i am saying is that most kids find "better" things to waste their lives on than shooting people.

The problem is obvious and is systemic in our society. The focus is on the inanimate object more than the people that use it. Until that changes, there will always be more of this stuff happening.

i think the focus should be on mental health issues, which are an epidemic, imo.  but you seem to think this is all about the object for me.

[mmhmm]

I found this article this morning:

Attention-seeking Teens


These kids, it appears, have been in trouble before.  Could it be we're too easy on petty crime committed by young folks?  I believe that to be the case.  Too many figure they'll skate because they're "kids".  Sorry.  IMO, if you commit a crime, violent or not, you've just taken on the adult responsibility to pay for that crime.  These kids were plenty old enough to know what they were doing was dead-arsed wrong. No excuses and no leniency is the best course of action.  MOO

[frankq]

i think the focus should be on mental health issues, which are an epidemic, imo. but you seem to think this is all about the object for me.

I didn't mention you at all, but all this "it wouldn't have happened if not for the gun" nonsense coming in from the usual anti-gunners is getting old. We can have gun debates in their own forum. This isn't about guns, it's about bad seeds. Evil people do evil things. The BTK killer didn't use a gun, Dahmer didn't use a gun, Gacy didn't use a gun, the two teens who killed the 88 year old WWII vet didn't use a gun. Mental issues are an obvious problem, but the problem is in identifying people who are truly sick and people who do truly sick things. There is a huge difference. My problem comes in when people rush to blame things other than the people who committed the act. People are accountable for their actions. Teenagers know right from wrong. Nobody can tell me that a 14,15 or 16 year old doesn't know that killing somebody is wrong. People need to stop blaming "stuff" for the bad things that happen. "Stuff" can't do anything if not for a person to lend a "hand".

[frankq]

Aug 24, 2013 11:11:20 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I found this article this morning:

Attention-seeking Teens


These kids, it appears, have been in trouble before.  Could it be we're too easy on petty crime committed by young folks?  I believe that to be the case.  Too many figure they'll skate because they're "kids".  Sorry.  IMO, if you commit a crime, violent or not, you've just taken on the adult responsibility to pay for that crime.  These kids were plenty old enough to know what they were doing was dead-arsed wrong. No excuses and no leniency is the best course of action.  MOO

Absolutely.

[frankq]

From mmhmm's source:

Ryan Benton, a youth minister at First Christian Church in Duncan who has known Edwards for years, said he had never seen his aggressive side and thinks of him as a boy who had a hunger to be important and to fit in somewhere.

Benton said Edwards had great leadership skills but also enjoyed being the center of attention.

"He was loud, he was witty, he was funny," Benton said. "Sometimes, his mouth would get to speak before his head even worked."

But Edwards also struggled with his identity, Benton said, and would sometimes cry on the minister's shoulder when feeling conflicted about choosing between right and wrong.


Boo fkn hoo.....Do you see that tear poking out from under my eye? With all due respect Father, Brother or Mister Benton, I hope inmates use young Mr. Edwards ass for a hand puppet. That goes for his buddies too.

[cereb]

Aug 23, 2013 17:15:59 GMT -5 frankq said:

It told me that you guys would have exactly the same response that you had. Based on your fear of a piece of metal that has irresistibly evil psychic properties and the ability to control the minds of anyone within visual range. Perhaps the answer is for everyone to wear a rosary with a cross to ward off the evil spirits of "the gun". Obviously it's guns that are responsible for crimes, people just can't help themselves.....

LOL! I have no fear of the piece of metal unless it's in the possession of a fucktard. I own several of my own (guns, not fucktards) but lets be realistic here for a moment. The presence of a gun increases the odds that someone is going to die during the committing of a crime or the attempt at suicide. Exponentially. If you can't at least admit that fact, you just are not living in reality.