here we go again: shooting at high school in Washington

<p>

</p>

<p>I think it was the giving of a lethal weapon to a three year old.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s what I understood. Not the parents of the shooter.</p>

<p>No one ever thinks their precious child is capable of murder. Which is the problem. </p>

<p>No child needs to have access to a lethal weapon. Period. You want to train? There are bb guns. I know plenty of hunters who show their kids how to use bb guns but keep their deadly weapons out of the house completely. </p>

<p>I spent the weekend visiting my older two kids at their college and was rather disconnected, so just saw this. I clicked on the link, saw the name, and felt like I was punched in the stomach. We have known this kid through youth wrestling since he was 4 or 5, same age and weight classes over the years as my youngest. My boy stopped wrestling after 7th grade so we haven’t seen him or the family for a few years.</p>

<p>I guess things like Columbine and Jonesboro just always seemed so far away. No more.</p>

<p>I’m sorry . . . to me it feels like it hits closer to home as well as based on things that one can see and know outwardly it isn’t’ the sore of thing where I feel like anyone could have seen it coming. There are other shooters where people don’t exactly see it coming but they aren’t completely surprised either. This seems to have genuinely taken people aback and not just the statements from family and tribe.</p>

<p>I had read somewhere that Gia Soriano was shot in the back of the head and the bullet exited through her left eye. It is difficult to imagine how she would have been had she survived. Her poor parents. One shudders to imagine the pain. Bless them for donating her organs.</p>

<p>Romani, you do not seem to be at all familiar with native culture.
Fishing, hunting and gathering is what the Tulalip are about.
A BB gun would not be used to hunt.
My husband fired one at a racoon in our yard and it didn’t even pierce his fur!
I would also disagree that some are incapable of killing.
Given motivation, tools and opportunity, I think everyone is capable.</p>

<p>Note: the shooter did not use a hunting rifle. He used a handgun.</p>

<p>He had a hunting rifle and was an experienced hunter but used a handgun that belonged to his dad.</p>

<p>My understanding is that they were mostly shot in the back of the head</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I mean, I do have a minor in Native American studies… </p>

<p>I stand by what I said. Hunting does not need to involve guns. I know many First Nations peoples (Great Lakes bands) who do not use guns to hunt at all. They like to use more “traditional” methods like bow and arrow if they hunt at all. </p>

<p>I think the issue of hunting is a red herring in this particular case.</p>

<p>My husband is a bow hunter and it is not a great subsistence method because our state resource managers put the bow season too early when it is still hot then later after modern firearm season. They also closed quite a few places units that were ideal for bow hunting. My DH no longer does modern fire arm hunting unless he goes out duck hunting with my BIL but BIL and nephew hunt ducks, pheasant and brant regularly. Nephew has a hunting rifle that is locked in the gun safe and he doesn’t have access to it - nor do my kids when they are there. He is 16 now but has hunted with his own rifle since he was 11. They eat everything they hunt in case you were worried. First Nations or not . . . modern rifle is the best way to fill the freezer. In fact, it’s been several years since we had venison at Christmas :(</p>

<p>The only way that hunting is an issue as far as I can see is that the shooter didn’t miss.</p>

<p>Just to be clear . . . I am not trying to be an apologist. The shooter should not have had ready access to the firearms. My point is that having them in the house and a teen hunting is not at all unusual and this doesn’t seem to be any kind of glorification of weapons. I don’t know it it’s still up but several days ago when I looked at the shooters FB “likes” with the exception of a few teen boy types of things they were predominantly native drumming, hunting, fishing and other things like that . . . pretty non-scary outdoorsy and Native Pride stuff. He didn’t seem to have a “guns n ammo” fixation.</p>

<p>Saintfan, that’s what bothered me about the ‘they’re ignorant bubbas’ comment. As you said, we don’t know if the family was part of the ‘guns and ammo’ crowd.</p>

<p>The “ignorant bubbas” comment was, I believe, in response to the case of the 3-year-old getting his hands on a loaded weapon. And yes, there are lots of ignorant bubbas out there, as evidenced by the number of times this exact scenario happens.</p>

<p>I think it was also in response to the notion of teaching a 3-year-old to treat a gun RESPONSIBLY and leaving a loaded gun on the bed with kiddo. </p>

<p>I think hunting is relevant in that the shooter was able to shoot five of his family members and friends at close range, see the carnage he was causing, and continue in his mission. It seems to me that having killed animals and posed with animals he had killed may have made him more efficient and unwavering at this horrible task. Of course, this is speculation on my part.</p>

<p>I am very anti-gun. That said, it doesn’t bother me at all that this kid, or any other teen, goes hunting with their family and if the hunting rifles are secured. I don’t see that as a big issue in this case (you could say it made him a better shot but on the other hand, he shot the other kids at pretty close range). A bigger issue to me is that he had easy access to a handgun and he should not have. Perhaps had he not had such easy access to that gun, he may have attempted to “solve” the angst and issues he had with himself and with these other kids in a less deadly fashion. For example, the previous week he was in a fight (not that I am condoning fights but it is more in the normal realm of teen conflicts than shooting up your friends). Also, the fact that he was able to “attack” five people in a short period of time is due to having a gun, whereas most other means would not have had the same effect before someone intervened.</p>