Shoot this guy

Filed in National by on January 18, 2013

Armed Guard Hired In Newtown’s Wake Leaves Gun In Bathroom

2:17 PM EST, Friday January 18, 2013 An armed guard at a Lapeer, Mich., charter school — hired in the wake of the Newtown massacre — made a “breach of security” this week when he left his gun unattended in the bathroom…

Not the Onion.

To paraphrase the brilliant GOB Bluth, “It’s guns Michael. What could possibly go wrong?”

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (11)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. puck says:

    That didn’t take long.

  2. anonymous says:

    What to call people who shouldn’t have guns, “dangerous persons,” “dangerous people.” I even called the murderer, a “youth” at one point, instead of a young man, even though in the back of my mind, I knew another ‘category’ should need to be discussed, but at another time.

    The president of the NRA stepped forward and said he would “like lawmakers to pay more attention to treatment for violent, mentally ill people – rather than restrict gun rights. They found a category of people to focus attention on, I thought.

    I felt something else was at play. Instead, as I typed, I searched my head for the human label, terrorist, psychopaths, criminals, angry men came to mind, but they weren’t the right words. Then glancing down Obama/Biden’s list of 23 Executive Actions, I saw a phrase among those they used, such as “individuals,”ownership,” “sellers,”
    “dangerous people.”

    “Dangerous people,” would be the ‘more inclusive’ word one should use, especially since these bright leaders were using it, it must be the right phase. Their List kept things inclusive, with labels such as ” doctor’s patients.” “individual prohibited,” “shooter situations.”

    Some on the blog conversations did follow the NRA lead. Someone even stretched reality, “..more people are killed every year ‘by hammers’ and’ bats’ than rifle. Yep, the ‘hammers and bats’ got up and killed people , while of course guns didn’t, because guns are just harmless objects locked up for sport and rights, because you know, ‘guns don’t kill people.’ Some 100,000 bullets somehow propel themselves into human flesh each year.

    Combine the ‘dangerous persons’ list, with some other groups of Americans – who readily admit they own guns – men, older Americans, Midwesterners, Southerners, Republicans, and whites and what do you get?

    But of course, we should not insult, alienate or anger certain ‘people.’ Especially, ‘people’ with guns. We should always say, mass murder, rape, war, torture, terrorism, incest, sexual abuse, sexualized murder, and genocide are committed by -’people.’ For instances, ” the woman was raped,” they tortured..,” and now, mass murder committed by a ‘dangerous person.’

    Otherwise, who might rise up, counter claiming, angrily denying, attacking, pointing out the examples, changing the subject to the other 15%, so – the 85% should continue to be discussed – equally as ‘persons.’ And especially, one should avoid mentioning a major factor in violent crimes – the overwhelming category of the 90% of ‘people,’ who kill.

    And therefore, the 90% who kill, aren’t the problem at all, it’s a ‘people’ problem we must continue to think about, those ‘dangerous people.’

    But the ‘problem’ will remain, because, not a word thus far, about those ’90% who actually do commit the violent crimes;’ or the 85% who commit crimes, or the 76% plus, who commit mass murders.

    Apparently maintaining ‘the status quo,’ is an inborn, inherent, intrinsic factor that shouldn’t be mentioned. Although, “The Scripps study found that 73 percent of all mass murders were committed by males, 6 percent by females and 21 percent by people of unknown gender because police did not catch them.” It’s your guess, on how many of the unknowns were also males.

    Keene, co-founder of Right On Crime, a conservative think tank that focuses on the criminal justice system, opposes loosening restrictions on the type of crime-gun information federal law enforcement agencies can release to the public.

    Here’s how men ban gun-related research.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

    For good measure, they also went after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for funding the research. According to the NRA, such “science is not legitimate.” To make sure federal agencies got the message, Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.) sponsored an amendment that stripped $2.6 million from the CDC’s budget.

    The “science is not legitimate.” Where have you heard that before.

    Currently 4 of 10 guns are purchased without a back ground check.

    Of those that do bother to apply their stats look like this:

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/14/justice/guns-background-check/index.html

    From available reports I could find, men are the majority possessors of guns, men are the majority of wrongful users of guns, men are more likely the victims of guns violence, men suffer violence by their own guns, men commit suicide with their own guns and men commit the most threats and violence toward the rest of the people. However, I could find no studies about why that is and what the government intends to do about it.

    I can’t help wonder if men are shoving the life boat out to sea, full of guns, but unmanned.

  3. puck says:

    This reminds me of that scene in “The Godfather.”

  4. kavips says:

    He had previously gone through two “NRA sponsored” safety classes.

  5. anonymous says:

    Question for Markell,Biden,Denn

    “No Harm, No Foul”

    So much for the ‘retired’ officer as the trained, low cost ‘hired gun.’

    This retired man forgot and left his gun at the kiddies’ restroom. Perhaps the man thought the gun interfered with his more important business at hand. And then he forgot – why he was at the school. The school obviously expected an expert in gun handling, a man with training, judgement and recollection.

    “Lapeer County Prosecutor Byron Konschuh said since nobody was harmed, the incident {the man leaving his gun laying around in a school restroom} likely would not constitute a criminal charge.” What.. no guns laws violated there? That also flies in the face of reason. Does the county, state or federal government have no laws that were violated by the man’s total lack of gun safety – in a school, at a place where a child might be unattended no less?

    Lapeer County Prosecutor Byron Konschuh said since nobody was harmed, the incident likely would not constitute a criminal charge.”If you left a gun unattended and a toddler finds it and shoots and hurts someone, it could be some kind of reckless use of a firearm,” Konschuh said. {Seriously folks.} “Since that did not happen, it’s likely no criminal act was committed, It’s almost like no harm no foul.” Konschuh continued.

    Almost? No, it isn’t like that at all. Does this lack of gun safety requirement apply to every gun owner, the tens of millions of them? Leaving a gun lying around in a school bathroom, is harmful and should definitely be against the law. Did this guy even pass a gun safety or background check? Yes, he had been a – Certified Firearms Instructor. So much for firearm safety.

    Wasn’t the entire premise of having a retired officer at a school, to keep “dangerous person/guns” out of the school? The man, removing his gun from his person, plus his leaving it available for kids in a school restroom, would have to mean breach of laws. This man disregarded everything regarding gun handling, safety and training as well as common sense of anyone who isn’t ‘trained’ to handle a gun. The County Prosecutor imagines such breaches don’t constitute a criminal charge. If the average gun owner left his gun laying around in a toy department, would the reaction be, “no harm no foul?” Or would there be a full blown search for a madman?

    Yes, the people know, the laws apply to some people, and the same laws don’t apply to other people. It’s called, lack of confidence in their government. Lawmakers need to fix the government. ‘Public Servants’ should realize, that’s most likely why 45 million households have guns. Gun owners may think – they may one day have to take the law into their own hands.

    The question is, should this man still be allowed to keep his guns? Yes or ‘no harm no foul.’

  6. Dana Garrett says:

    I agree with the proposals Obama made about gun ownership, registration, etc. If anything, I’d like to see more restrictions. But I must confess I’m kicking around the proposal that we should have trained armed police persons or guards stationed in schools. While I don’t like the image of schools being a place where that needs to occur, one must/should come to the point where reality (especially repeated dangerous realities) dissuades one from his/her wishes. But as the above article illustrates, there are dangers associated with the armed guard “solution.” So, I don’t know what to think.

  7. Truth Teller says:

    Dana the problem is that the idea of having armed guards in school seems to go along with the NRA’s idea that the only way to stop a bad man with a guy is to have a good man with a gun also.

    This theory was put into practice right here in Wilmington in the Eden Park soccer incident where 3 bad men showed up and killed the coach who was a witness in one of the bad men’s murder trial someone or several in the crowed returned fire ( not sure if they were good men or bad men) killing one of the shooters and wounding the other 2 the end result was a 17 year old boy waiting for his turn to play was shot in the head and killed it is yet to be determined who shot him GOOD GUY OR BAD GUY?

  8. mike says:

    Why is it that the folks leaving guns in bathrooms & such are always law enforcement? You know, the very people anti-gunners here at Delawareliberal trust to carry guns

Switch to our mobile site