Split Thread: 6 yr old in custody after shooting teacher

[Rolfe]

Originally Posted by Planigale

I think it may be hard to know what a six year old child's intention were. In part because of how much they would really understand the consequences of any actions.

This reminds me of something I did when I was, I think, a little older than six.

I lived on a busy trunk road - the A71 in fact. There was a 30mph limit where I lived, but you could already see the end of speed limit sign not far past my house and traffic going over 30 was common. Not that I had figured any of that out at this point.

There was a lot of snow lying, and we kids were walking home and messing about after school. We started throwing snowballs at the cars. I noticed that the snowballs were all hitting the side windows, and figured that if I aimed in front of the car, by the time the snowball got to the car it would intersect with the windscreen.

I got it bang on first time. Literally. While the cars being hit on the side windows hadn't reacted at all, this car braked and swerved. The driver had obviously had a significant fright. So did I. I simply hadn't thought about the impact on the driver of a snowball hitting smack on the middle of the windscreen when he was going along about 40mph.

Fortunately the driver coped and there was no accident. I never threw anything at a car again, ever.

[mgidm86]

This thread is representative of how my country responds to gun violence. Even a 6 year-old shooter is only worth maybe 2 pages and change these days.

That is not a criticism to anyone here, I promise.

I'm just saying this story has dropped off the news radar and is just another statistic. I guess he needed to shoot more people to make a real statement. Ya sure who am I kidding?

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

This reminds me of something I did when I was, I think, a little older than six.

I lived on a busy trunk road - the A71 in fact. There was a 30mph limit where I lived, but you could already see the end of speed limit sign not far past my house and traffic going over 30 was common. Not that I had figured any of that out at this point.

There was a lot of snow lying, and we kids were walking home and messing about after school. We started throwing snowballs at the cars. I noticed that the snowballs were all hitting the side windows, and figured that if I aimed in front of the car, by the time the snowball got to the car it would intersect with the windscreen.

I got it bang on first time. Literally. While the cars being hit on the side windows hadn't reacted at all, this car braked and swerved. The driver had obviously had a significant fright. So did I. I simply hadn't thought about the impact on the driver of a snowball hitting smack on the middle of the windscreen when he was going along about 40mph.

Fortunately the driver coped and there was no accident. I never threw anything at a car again, ever.

Let's not mention cars speeding where children are. One of my children was nearly run over by a car running a red.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Let's not mention cars speeding where children are. One of my children was nearly run over by a car running a red.

What was your child doing on the road?

[Rolfe]

Crossing on the green man, by the sound of it.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

Crossing on the green man, by the sound of it.

On reflection, that makes sense.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

What was your child doing on the road?

Crossing the road at a traffic light controlled pedestrian crossing?

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Crossing the road at a traffic light controlled pedestrian crossing?

On reflection, that makes sense.

[Gulliver Foyle]

Originally Posted by Planigale

I think it may be hard to know what a six year old child's intention were. In part because of how much they would really understand the consequences of any actions.

Yeah, that's what I thought too. My mind boggled when I started hearing that the peelers were saying the shooting was deliberate. A six year old child doesn't have the emotional intelligence necessary to process the consequences of firing a gun at someone.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

Yeah, that's what I thought too. My mind boggled when I started hearing that the peelers were saying the shooting was deliberate. A six year old child doesn't have the emotional intelligence necessary to process the consequences of firing a gun at someone.

Exactly. I think the cops are doing all in their power to blame the child.

[Nessie]

Originally Posted by lionking

Exactly. I think the cops are doing all in their power to blame the child.

I wonder if the child's parent is a cop

[lionking]

Originally Posted by Nessie

I wonder if the child's parent is a cop

I think it would be reported if that was the case.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

Yeah, that's what I thought too. My mind boggled when I started hearing that the peelers were saying the shooting was deliberate. A six year old child doesn't have the emotional intelligence necessary to process the consequences of firing a gun at someone.

This is an outlier but of course a 6 year old knows what the gun is for.

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by Samson

This is an outlier but of course a 6 year old knows what the gun is for.

Not really. They only know a cartoon version of what guns do.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Not really. They only know a cartoon version of what guns do.

Given what's on TV in the US as a matter of course, that's doubtful.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by Samson

This is an outlier but of course a 6 year old knows what the gun is for.

Utter nonsense.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by lionking

Utter nonsense.

This sounds like a pro forma response.

[Ian Osborne]

Originally Posted by Samson

This is an outlier but of course a 6 year old knows what the gun is for.

I'm inclined to agree. When I was that age, I was playing army games in the playground. Of course, after we'd been 'killed', we got up again afterwards. A six-year-old might understand what a gun is for, but the finality of pulling the trigger probably escapes them.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Samson

This is an outlier but of course a 6 year old knows what the gun is for.

Originally Posted by Ian Osborne

I'm inclined to agree. When I was that age, I was playing army games in the playground. Of course, after we'd been 'killed', we got up again afterwards. A six-year-old might understand what a gun is for, but the finality of pulling the trigger probably escapes them.

Which is not what guns do. But a cartoon version.

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Not really. They only know a cartoon version of what guns do.

Indeed. They might know that guns kill , but the idea that they might permanently maim someone is a different thing. Or indeed have an understanding of the consequences as opposed to "baddies get killed"



.

[Carrot Flower King]

Originally Posted by Ian Osborne

I'm inclined to agree. When I was that age, I was playing army games in the playground. Of course, after we'd been 'killed', we got up again afterwards. A six-year-old might understand what a gun is for, but the finality of pulling the trigger probably escapes them.

The whole issue of what a child/young person understands about death was a part of my work when doing overdose assessments, as it would help me decide just how scary someone was.

One of the scariest I met was a 14 year old who genuinely believed that death meant going to a heaven where everything they wanted, which nasty adults were currently preventing, would come to pass. This made death very desirable for them, hence they were very scary. A consultant colleague used to describe a 7 year old who was convinced that 1 anti-biotic would kill them (they'd had it hammered into them that this was mummy's very strong medicine and they shouldn't go anywhere near it).

What any given child actually understands about these topics needs to be considered on an individual basis and unpicked very carefully.

[newyorkguy]

CNN reported on Tuesday:

Quote:

Police received the call that a teacher had been shot at 1:59 p.m., Drew said. When officers entered the classroom five minutes later, the boy was being physically restrained by a school employee, police said. He was combative and struck the employee restraining him. Officers escorted him from the building and into a police car. CNN link

Would a six-year-old understand it was wrong to strike an adult? If it's going to be argued, 'No, a six-year-old would not understand it is wrong to strike an adult,' that begs the question, 'What does a six-year-old understand?' Anything?

Is it wrong to run into traffic? Is it wrong to hit a dog with a hammer? Is it wrong to set fire to your house?

From a St. Louis TV station:

Quote:

Seven kids took part in the experiment at the 5 On Your Side studio. Our team used eight cameras, six microphones and six air-soft guns in this experiment. Our staff hid the air-soft guns in a room full of toys. The children played in the room while their parents watched them from a different room. The children were on camera, but they did not know it at the time...There were three kids in the second group. They ranged in age from 4- to 6-years-old. Their playtime in the room ended quickly. One of the kids found an airsoft gun right away. He put the gun down and another child ran from the room to get a parent. KSDK TV link*

[theprestige]

I feel like I had a pretty good grasp of right and wrong, by the time I reached first grade.

I beat a kid up - well, I pushed him down - for calling me rude names. I knew it was wrong, in the sense that physical violence is taboo, and that I'd get in trouble if the grown-ups found out. I also felt it was necessary, in the sense that it was worth the risk. Very much a case of being willing to do the time for the crime.

I think six year olds in general know right and wrong pretty well. They may still struggle with impulse control, and they may not always know all the nuances of what is expected and what is prohibited by society, and they may not always grasp the severity of certain crimes. But they know in general what crimes are and not to do them. Things like bringing a gun to school and shooting your teacher.

[Rolfe]

This may not be a "six-year-old-in-general" though, depending on his home upbringing.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

This may not be a "six-year-old-in-general" though, depending on his home upbringing.

Indeed, we know that he is a six year old who had access to loaded firearms at home.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

This may not be a "six-year-old-in-general" though, depending on his home upbringing.

I understood nyg's question to be a "six-year-old-in-general" question. It makes sense to wonder how far this particular six year old deviates from the norm, but it also makes sense to try to agree first on what the norm is.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by mgidm86

....
I'm just saying this story has dropped off the news radar and is just another statistic. I guess he needed to shoot more people to make a real statement. Ya sure who am I kidding?

It's dropped off the news radar because there's nothing new to report. The kid is not at large; he was taken into custody at the scene. He is too young to be charged criminally. His mother bought the gun legally; whether she can be charged with negligence is still being investigated. The teacher is recovering. What else is there to say?

But there is new reporting that security is being tightened at this elementary school, including the installation of metal detectors at all schools in the system.
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news...hool-shooting/

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by Bob001

It's dropped off the news radar because there's nothing new to report. The kid is not at large; he was taken into custody at the scene. He is too young to be charged criminally. His mother bought the gun legally; whether she can be charged with negligence is still being investigated. The teacher is recovering. What else is there to say?

But there is new reporting that security is being tightened at this elementary school, including the installation of metal detectors at all schools in the system.
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news...hool-shooting/

Nah. The kids will just bring Glock 17's to school!

[newyorkguy]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I feel like I had a pretty good grasp of right and wrong, by the time I reached first grade...

You're not the only one.



Remember this book?

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by Samson

This is an outlier but of course a 6 year old knows what the gun is for.

No, just no. If I thought you were seriously interested I'd suggest you study up on child development and psychology.

At age 6 children are barely starting to think about the future and comprehend cause-and-effect relationships.

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by newyorkguy

CNN reported on Tuesday:


Would a six-year-old understand it was wrong to strike an adult? If it's going to be argued, 'No, a six-year-old would not understand it is wrong to strike an adult,' that begs the question, 'What does a six-year-old understand?' Anything?

Is it wrong to run into traffic? Is it wrong to hit a dog with a hammer? Is it wrong to set fire to your house?

Try here, here, here and here.

Quote:

Most children by age 6:

Continue to have fears typical of the preschool years, such as fear of monsters, kidnappers, and large animals.
Want their parents to play with them. Parents are their main source of companionship and affection. A gradual shift begins, though, to fulfilling more of these needs with friends and other people they admire, such as teachers.
Play in ways that include a lot of fantasy and imagination.
Often like to be the "big kid" and feel as if they are taking care of a younger child.
Usually like to play with friends of the same gender. Boys most often play with other boys, girls most often play with other girls.
Start to understand the feelings of others, with the encouragement of parents and other caregivers. But they are still most focused on themselves.
Are developing a sense of humour. They may like simple jokes and funny books and rhymes.

[mgidm86]

Originally Posted by Bob001

It's dropped off the news radar because there's nothing new to report. The kid is not at large; he was taken into custody at the scene. He is too young to be charged criminally. His mother bought the gun legally; whether she can be charged with negligence is still being investigated. The teacher is recovering. What else is there to say?

But there is new reporting that security is being tightened at this elementary school, including the installation of metal detectors at all schools in the system.
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news...hool-shooting/

I guess I'm disappointed because, once again, this shooting won't change anything. I keep reading about actual civilized countries that react in horror to such shootings and agree to make changes as a country. Then I look at my country and hope that something, anything will make a difference, and it never does.

In fact, if this doesn't change how people feel then what will? Dozens of kids being shot at a school? Nope, been there already!

The news to me is that there should be plenty to report, but there isn't. What I should be seeing in the news is somebody giving any kind of a damn. Laws suggested, other gun owners maybe pissed off at the idiots who store guns this way. Anything.

I want to see reports on what is going to be done about this, screaming ******* headlines demanding action. I'd like to help but where and how?

Look, maybe there are headlines here and there. Mainly I'm just pissed off, ******* angry and worried as hell and I don't know what to do or say to make it better.

I guess I thought this shooting would be outrageous enough. I should know better though. That's all. Just a rant I guess.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by mgidm86

I guess I thought this shooting would be outrageous enough. I should know better though. That's all. Just a rant I guess.

No matter how outrageous the shooting, the answer for gun lobby (and the GOP) is always going to be more guns.

[mgidm86]

Hey we have made great strides in our understanding of gun violence:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/15/us/vi...aws/index.html

Quote:

Research shows child access prevention and safe storage laws are effective in reducing shootings among youth,

Finally we figured this one out! With "research" no less.

Quote:

“It’s important to frame the issue as not just keeping yourself and your family member safe in your home, but making sure that the guns you own don’t fall into the hands of people who shouldn’t have them....."

Gun Ownership 101 one would think.

Quote:

Many communities across the nation are familiar with the traumatic effects of school shootings,

No ******* ****, Sherlock. Who isn't?

Quote:

There are key differences between child access prevention laws and safe storage laws, and the provisions of each vary widely from state to state.

It's okay in many states not to secure your guns at all.

Quote:

“Very rarely are people actually held accountable when someone who is unauthorized, like a child, gains access to their firearms and uses them to harm themselves or someone else,” Crifasi explained. “It’s exceedingly rare to see people charged and punished in some way with fines or even jail time.”

Wow. This is never going to end.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by The Don

No matter how outrageous the shooting, the answer for gun lobby (and the GOP) is always going to be more guns.

Well, imagine if the teacher had been packing her own heat. She at least would have had a chance.

[Bob001]

If there's such a thing as a bad seed, this kid may be it.

Quote:

The Virginia teacher who was shot by a 6-year-old student repeatedly asked administrators for help with the boy but officials downplayed educators’ warnings about his behavior, including dismissing his threat to light a teacher on fire and watch her die, according to messages from teachers obtained by The Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md...gs-downplayed/

[Brainster]

Looks like this is an exceptionally troubled kid, not just some youngster who happened to find a gun. The local paper reports:

Quote:

On Thursday, the boy’s family issued its first public comments since the Jan. 6 shooting, expressing sympathy for 25-year-old teacher who was wounded and disclosing that the boy suffers from “an acute disability” and was under a specialized care plan at school.

Later:

Quote:

The family’s statement also disclosed the boy was under a care plan in which his parents attended school with him. But on Jan. 6 — the day the boy suddenly shot his teacher in the middle of class — the parents were not at the school.

“The week of the shooting was the first week when we were not in class with him,” the family’s statement said. “We will regret our absence on this day for the rest of our lives.”

Italics added for emphasis--that's a pretty startling care plan.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Brainster

Looks like this is an exceptionally troubled kid, not just some youngster who happened to find a gun. The local paper reports:



Later:



Italics added for emphasis--that's a pretty startling care plan.

You'd think that given that care plan, they'd have made a greater effort to secure their weapons around him.

I'd be interested to get the school's view of how well they think the parents were adhering to the plan.

[Planigale]

Originally Posted by The Don

You'd think that given that care plan, they'd have made a greater effort to secure their weapons around him.

I'd be interested to get the school's view of how well they think the parents were adhering to the plan.

The article says the guns secured with a trigger lock and on a high shelf that should be out of easy reach of a sx year old.

The management plan was apparently successful as the article says the parents accompanying the child has stopped that week.

I say apparently because obviously it wasn't.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Brainster

Looks like this is an exceptionally troubled kid, not just some youngster who happened to find a gun.

...snip....

You mean he came across it when walking to school or it was in the bottom of his locker?

Sorry but he didn't happen to find a gun, his parents left a (loaded) gun where a 6 year old could get his hands on it and they didn't even know he had it

Whether a 6 year old is angel or devil that is beyond negligence. They are not fit parents.

[Ian Osborne]

Originally Posted by Darat

They are not fit parents.

Nor are they fit gun owners, but America doesn't seem to care about that.