13-year-old boy fatally shot man whose leg was blocking aisle of bus, Denver police say
originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com to 
apnews.com
Denver police have arrested a 13-year-old boy accused of fatally shooting a man whose leg was blocking the aisle on a public bus.
You are viewing a single comment
at 13 you should be able to be trosted with a gun. tthis is a parenting issue.
So strange that you would make this comment on an article that perfectly exemplifies why we don't let children walk around with guns.
This same person told me in another thread that the reason guns should be legal in the U.S. is protection against bears and mountain lions- which almost never attack anyone. Like less than 100 times in the last 50 years combined. They can't even come up with a good argument for adults to have guns.
Speak for yourself, I get viciously mauled by a mountain lion every time I go grocery shopping.
Maybe you are just hot and attracting a lot of cougars.
Honestly it doesn't really matter. The second amendment does exist, so some arms in the hands of the populace will be allowed unless we amend our constitution.
That said, we can draw lines based around what kinds of weapons. And something like a bolt action rifle or pump shotgun can be excellent for hunting, but very difficult to conceal or commit any kind of mass shooting with.
It's semi-autos that are specifically capable of high rates of fire and quick reloads, and that become dangerous. We can regulate some of those arms the same way we regulate access to tanks, jets, nukes and chemical/biological arms.
As a longtime SAR guy --I'm in my 50s-- I always tell people to carry a gun in the backcountry if that's what makes them feel safe, but just know that you're far far far more likely to get in trouble from things like weather, terrain, rivers, meltwater, falling, exposure, hypothermia and just the elements in general than you are from any animal. The risk profiles aren't even remotely close. This is true even in places like Alaska where almost everyone is armed. As far as I'm concerned, a gun is dead weight. Lose it and concentrate instead on carrying the ten essentials and knowing how to use them
I like your writing style and approach. If you published a book on this topic, I would likely read it.
Used to have to shoot cottonmouths and copperheads all the time when I lived out in the country. We were too far from a hospital to chance it with poisonous snakes. Glad we moved
Which is a valid argument because people out in the country can get bitten by snakes and be too far from a hospital. The only time he mentioned poisonous snakes was when he said people need guns to protect themselves from rattlesnakes in Dallas.
I have killed plenty of snakes in my life and never once thought a gun would be useful for that task.
Snake/rat shot is designed for this task. Basically small shotgun pellets in a handgun cartridge. I'd think it a rather small target to aim a regular bullet at.
Hunting
Yes, that would definitely be one of the many, many better arguments for guns than 'protection against bears and mountain lions.'
Even then, though, you don't need pistols for hunting.
I do know of people who hunt with handguns, but it is definitely rarer. I honestly don't have any issues with hunting if you eat what you hunt. If you just do it to massacre an animal and just leave it where you killed it, fuck you, but I have no issue with responsible hunting practices.
That said, it's my understanding that bow hunting is the fastest, and thus most painless way of killing an animal.
That is completely False.
I have shells that will cause a 3 to 4 inch cavitation hole when they hit something causing a large amount of damage and blood loss that will kill with any hit in the chest area.
With a bow, even if you hit the heart it will still take time, especially if you miss and then it is bleeding, suffering, and you have to track it.
At top skill in both I would say it is a tie in that both have the potential to kill instantly, a bow is more likely to harm than kill at lower skill levels though.
Fair enough. I'm not a hunter. That's just something I've been told before.
.357 mag will kill a deer
Yes but you'd struggle to get close enough to make a reliably good shot. Ranged shots are what rifles are for.
Most of the things I’ve shot in my life with the rifle I was close enough I could’ve done it with a pistol.
We hunt in forests around here not plains.
Pistol shooting practice is typically done at no more than 25 yards, while hunting rifles can more comfortably do a longer range. Sure, you can hit with a pistol at similar ranges (especially with a larger caliber as you propose) but rifles are better for controlling the recoil and typically more accurate. If the goal is to actually hit, and in particular kill painlessly, a rifle is the better tool.
I think the farthest shot I have had was maybe 35 yards.
You basically find a good trail and put up a blind or stand near it.
We have to cut our own firing lanes so short distances are much preferred. Lol
Tbf I carry a rifle any time I go in the woods damn near.
I love nature but am terrified of bears and I want a big firecracker, if it comes down to trying to use it on a bear that wants to fight I am probably already fucked and I know that.
If it makes you feel more secure, I won't judge you, but you should know that-
https://blog.batchgeo.com/bear-attack-statistics/
In contrast-
https://www.cpsc.gov/Newsroom/News-Releases/1975/CPSC-Releases-New-Study-On-Bathtub-And-Shower-Injuries
Oh I recognize that it is completely irrational.
It is just a childhood fear that I can’t beat.
Fair enough. Like I say, I'm not judging you. If that's what you need to feel secure, that's what you need to feel secure.
I don’t mean it that way, I was just acknowledging that I know it doesn’t make sense. lol
Statistics like this are bunk. If I'm camping in the forest my chances of having a bad encounter with a bear are astronomically higher than drowning in a bathtub. Context is everything when it comes to your specific risk profile.
Except your chances of having a bad encounter with a bear are almost zero. Because bears almost never attack humans. Which is the point.
An activity where you would definitely supervise the child, not send them off on their own on a bus.
Dawg there are so many ways to hunt that don't involve a bang.
Hey man, not cool to talk about my dating experience that way.
I know, I own those too.
My bow may be twenty years old but it kills just as good now as then.
Manlier ways to hunt. That's how you get to them. Guns are for sissies, bows are for real men.
I have both and they both have their advantages and disadvantages.
I prefer my rifle because it has a much much higher chance of a clean quick kill.
Personally if you are willing to let an animal suffer more to be more “manly” you were never manly at all.
I don't do either. I'm primarily vegetarian because I know I wouldn't want to kill an animal irl so I just generally avoid meat all together.
I literally can't wrap my head around the US's culture.
Guns for 13 year olds? Yes.
Some beer? Are you crazy?!
God forbid he sees a tittie
Forget about talking about sex either. Which is how EVERYONE got here. Backwards ass dumb ass thinking. I'm American btw
Well we couldn't give them guns AND beer.
That's not all of our culture. We're not all the same person and, as you can clearly see, that guy's attitude is not at all approved of lol
I'm not saying it's all of your culture. I'm sorry if it came across that way.
But it certainly is a shockingly large and loud part of it, and the lawmakers clearly have zero intention on stopping it, because not enough people want more restrictions.
Im with you all the way up until 'because'
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
Our disproportionate political representation is a huge part of the issue, and our media representation is very good at burying it. So you're not wrong, but it's certainly fair to say there's more to it.
I'm not saying that people who want law changes aren't the majority, I'm just saying it's not enough to actually change the laws (even if there is a small majority for it).
Things generally don't just happen whenever the public gets to 50% + 1 person support. Support generally has to be higher before things get pushed through.
That's... A take for sure. By all means, take your kid hunting and target practicing that young, instill good practices in them, but there's a big gulf between that and a teenager ever being in the situation in the article.
Why do you need to trust a 13 year old with a gun?
I'm not saying that you need to, I'm saying you should be able to.
Ok that solves everything then. He shouldn't have done that. Problem solved. /s
The question wasn't about trust. It was: "Why does he have access to a gun?"
i think we all agree he shouldn't have done that.
"Was that wrong? Should I have not done that? I tell you I gotta plead ignorance on this thing because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know, cause I've
workedridden in a lot ofofficesbusses and I tell you people do that all the time."I barely trust 13 year olds to properly wipe their asses, and that won't get people killed most likely.
Alright, you seem to have identified the problem now what do you think the solution is? Gun violence seems to be the worst in the areas with the most guns, is that just a human issue?
Not who you replied to, but I personally feel it's more than just guns.
It's the culture around guns, the worship of guns, the lack of better conflict resolution skills, the rise of extremist echo chambers, and harmful rhetoric online.
Even the "come and try to take them" and "fuck around and find out" attitude implicitly says that guns are going to solve whatever conflict people have and that it's a valid solution equal with other options. The rhetoric doesn't tell people that it's the option of last resort for conflicts.
We need to change our culture, our respect for guns, and ultimately give people better tools for solving conflicts. The solution isn't necessarily more laws, they can certainly be a part of it, but we aren't going to legislate this problem away.
If you are a gun owner, promote better safety with firearms. Call out those who treat them irresponsibly. If you are around those that act like they are the solution to all problems, give them shit for it. Make them realize it's not a proportional response to kill someone for a minor disagreement or property theft. Call people out who brandish their firearm - it's not a de-escalation.
Realize that not everyone is a threat and trying to harm you or your family. The people who are going to harm or kidnap you are so incredibly rare that you are unlikely to ever encounter them. And the situation where you don't have any other options but to kill them is even rarer. Most situations you can find a way to just leave. I'm not saying that there aren't dangerous people out there, but the vast majority are generally nice people that just want to live their own lives.
If you aren't a gun owner, take a safety class and learn a little about them. You don't have to like them or own one, but try to understand that there are many who do enjoy them. The majority of gun owners aren't the ones causing issues.
As a society, put more time and money into healthcare and particularly mental healthcare. Work to raise people out of poverty and remove the socioeconomic pressures that lead many towards crime. We need to spend more time with each other, see things from each other's point of view, and break down barriers between each other. We need to be more empathetic. We need to learn to accept losing in disagreements. Make it okay to be wrong.
Some of these arent truly concrete steps, but more of an ideal we need to work towards. But ultimately, it's our culture that needs to change. Our culture treats them as a solution to problems and that's why we see them used for even the dumbest of issues like a blocked aisle on a bus.
Gun issue probably won't be addressed for another 40 years until not just Boomers but Gen X go away.
They love their toys and romanticize being the hero (though statistically wind up being the villain or victim more frequently).
I think you'll find a stronger correlation between gun violence and economic disadvantages than you will with the mere presence of guns, but whatever
I'm guessing you're human and probably over 13, so I'm confused.
Did you not get the hormone rage? Were you not horribly stupid with bad judgement like the rest of us?