• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Teacher killed in Tacoma elementary school shooting, Local SeattlePI.com

Lammo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
580
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
imported post

Another murder-suicide in a gun free zone. Calls to further restrict law abiding gun owners in 5, 4, 3, . . . . Someone needs to teach these guys - - suicide then murder.
 

ak56

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
746
Location
Carnation, Washington, USA
imported post

Lammo wrote:
Another murder-suicide in a gun free zone. Calls to further restrict law abiding gun owners in 5, 4, 3, . . . . Someone needs to teach these guys - - suicide then murder.

I totally agree. If the media would start reporting these as suicide-murders instead of murder-suicides, then eventually some of these idiots might get confused and reverse the order.

Q13 mentioned something on-air this morning that there may be another related victim at another location, but I haven't heard or seen anything more on that.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

Lammo wrote:
Another murder-suicide in a gun free zone. Calls to further restrict law abiding gun owners in 5, 4, 3, . . . . Someone needs to teach these guys - - suicide then murder.

Isn't it great? Look at the Oregon case where a school teacher wanted to carry a pistol to protect herself against her ex. Permission denied of course. For some reason they feel that there is a magical force field that keeps people safe in schools.

I guess if someone wants to target someone what better place than one they know their victim will be totally unable to defend themselves?

At least Pierce County Deputies took care of business and there won't be any "not guilty by reason of mental defect" verdict.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
imported post

Let's see:

1) School Zone, Gun Free, Very Safe........................................CHECK!

2) Restraining Order, Paperwork, Very Safe.............................CHECK!

3)Restraining Order, Right to posses a firearm revoked.........CHECK!

4)Illegal Airsoft guns confiscated in Tacoma............................CHECK!



= Solution by the left (antis) reduced gun violence................

CHECK
!


NOT
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
imported post

I think this is another reason that legally armed citizens should be able to carry on school grounds.

It may not have changed the out come but one would of had the tools available to them in this time of need.

Likely this was a relationship gone bad and waiting to see if a restraining order was in place.
It should be well known by now that restraining orders are only after the fact in prosecuting the offender, it is not proactive as being armed for ones self defense.
 

GSXRrider

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
56
Location
Beaverton, ,
imported post

gogodawgs wrote:
Let's see:

1) School Zone, Gun Free, Very Safe........................................CHECK!

2) Restraining Order, Paperwork, Very Safe.............................CHECK!

3)Restraining Order, Right to posses a firearm revoked.........CHECK!

4)Illegal Airsoft guns confiscated in Tacoma............................CHECK!



= Solution by the left (antis) reduced gun violence................

CHECK
!


NOT
Wait, criminals don't obey the signs and laws?
 

GSXRrider

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
56
Location
Beaverton, ,
imported post

I'd reply on that news website but I hate making accounts for them all. Those anti gunners got under my skin! A teacher carrying is not going to shoot their student for cheating on a test! Jesus Christ man! What the heck is with these people???? They seem to think that anybody that has a gun is going to just shoot something/somebody when they get mad! Guess what, I argue with my GF and my Dad and my friends all the time, even while I might be packing a gun! But I never once have thought about pulling it out! They seem to think we are all crazy people. I remember somebody commenting a while back about national parks being gun free, because people would just shoot at animals and trees. I thought, then that person shouldn't be carrying a gun! I laugh at their stupidity....
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
imported post

BigDave wrote:
I think this is another reason that legally armed citizens should be able to carry on school grounds.

It may not have changed the out come but one would of had the tools available to them in this time of need.

Likely this was a relationship gone bad and waiting to see if a restraining order was in place.
It should be well known by now that restraining orders are only after the fact in prosecuting the offender, it is not proactive as being armed for ones self defense.
Dave, we can carry on school grounds. However, you must be picking up or dropping off a student or leave the firearm in your locked vehicle.
 

swatspyder

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
573
Location
University Place, Washington, USA
imported post

red_rocker said on February 26, 2010 at 1:25 PM
Yeah, Swatspider. Something else I've been quick to jump up on the soapbox with all along: Canadian citizens don't have to deal with this issue. Why is that? It's because they don't (and won't) let guns proliferate their society in the first place. Canada, Japan, Korea, and other countries I've been to seem pretty mellow. Why is that? It's because nobody feels in any danger. It's too late to do anything about the US because we let the danger and paranoia proliferate in the first place. Oh, but make no mistake, we feel FEAR. It controls us. The "right to keep and bear arms" is why we're defensive, living in fear, in paranoia, ready to lash out. Ready to defend ourselves and kill, and keep on killing because it's our constitutional RIGHT to keep and bear arms and use them to kill people.


swatspyder said on February 26, 2010 at 1:35 PM
(red_rocker said on February 26, 2010 at 1:25 PM) Blah Blah Blah... Too many characters for my message... ---------------------------------------- Well for instance, Canada is protected by the U.S.A. Second, Canada has less citizens than ALL OF CALIFORNIA, and they still have people being BEATEN, STABBED, and MURDERED with BLUNT OBJECTS. Third, AFAIK, Korea requires males to serve in the military at some point in their life, where they learn to shoot and carry firearms. Fourth, my point is, EVEN IF YOU REMOVE FIREARMS FROM THE WORLD... There is still knives, baseball bats, fists, legs and whatever else you can think of that can be used to kill someone. The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution was put in place as a last resort to PROTECT everyone in the U.S.A. from the GOVERNMENT. But today, we have individuals who are injuring and killing people out there. And besides, cars kill more people than guns. Why are we still driving?...
:lol:
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
imported post

gogodawgs wrote:
BigDave wrote:
I think this is another reason that legally armed citizens should be able to carry on school grounds.

It may not have changed the out come but one would of had the tools available to them in this time of need.

Likely this was a relationship gone bad and waiting to see if a restraining order was in place.
It should be well known by now that restraining orders are only after the fact in prosecuting the offender, it is not proactive as being armed for ones self defense.
Dave, we can carry on school grounds. However, you must be picking up or dropping off a student or leave the firearm in your locked vehicle.
Are we playing with semantics here? it is for picking up and dropping off students only, try going into the school or walking around the grounds.

As in this situation a Teacher nor you can carry a firearm into their classroom for protection.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

Thanks, Dave. I was going to remark on that.

Teachers are the key issue here, and the teachers can't carry because they're doing more than just picking up or dropping off.

If we trust these adults with our children's educations (and to not molest them, while I'm at it) then it's downright foolish to not trust them to take responsibility for their safety in the classroom.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
imported post

BigDave wrote:
gogodawgs wrote:
BigDave wrote:
I think this is another reason that legally armed citizens should be able to carry on school grounds.

It may not have changed the out come but one would of had the tools available to them in this time of need.

Likely this was a relationship gone bad and waiting to see if a restraining order was in place.
It should be well known by now that restraining orders are only after the fact in prosecuting the offender, it is not proactive as being armed for ones self defense.
Dave, we can carry on school grounds. However, you must be picking up or dropping off a student or leave the firearm in your locked vehicle.
Are we playing with semantics here? it is for picking up and dropping off students only, try going into the school or walking around the grounds.

As in this situation a Teacher nor you can carry a firearm into their classroom for protection.

Correct, not attempting to play semantics. You said school grounds, not in a school building. The law definately distinguishes between the two.

(1) It is unlawful for a person to carry onto, or to possess on, public or private elementary or secondary school premises, school-provided transportation, or areas of facilities while being used exclusively by public or private schools:


(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:

(e) Any person in possession of a pistol who has been issued a license under RCW 9.41.070, or is exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060, while picking up or dropping off a student;

(6) Except as provided in subsection (3)(b), (c), (f), and (h) of this section, firearms are not permitted in a public or private school building.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

So, differentiating between "school grounds" and "school buildings" in a discussion about what the law ought to be (rather than what it is) isn't playing the semantics game?
 
Top