6 year old shoots his teacher

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn

originally posted by: AOx6179
www.newschannel5.com...
One side affect of what you mentioned.
I'm searching for the other one now.

www.psychiatrictimes.com...
Not quite the article I was looking for but addresses the same issues of mind/behavior modification using Tik-tok.

Interesting. I can see where a constant triggering of the brain with images, requiring no active thought, could possibly have a negative effect.

I something that makes you go hmmmm.

The article I can't find was how the Chinese have weaponized that, and is using it to manipulate our youth into violence.
I haven't even mentioned, I don't think, about teen on teen violence that is skyrocketing. Brutal, vicious crimes, all done by minors.

Using this thread as a teaching tool, for myself, I do see many aspects and underlying issues, as to me wanting to know exactly why our kids are doing these things at such an alarming rate.

I think we're just doomed and the future that we fought so hard to provide our kids with will be a hell that we haven't even fathomed yet. Whatever it will be, it won't be good.

originally posted by: AOx6179

What will the next generation of kids be like???

I've read somewhere that is supposed to be the generation who saves us all, after being stripped of such menial things as sexual and racial identity that generation will want to live a more agrarian lifestyle shopping locally and being more environmentally conscious having a minimal carbon footprint.

Meanwhile we're apperently in this transition stage where the current cancel culture want to romanticize and make it heroic to be a victim...

Get a load of that George Floyd, the angel with wings and halo pointing his gun at a woman's pregnant belly.

Let just call it the Smollett syndrome.

It's a hit, the public is hooked.

I've read somewhere that is supposed to be the generation who saves us all, after being stripped of such menial things as sexual and racial identity that generation will want to live a more agrarian lifestyle shopping locally and being more environmentally conscious having a minimal carbon footprint.

a reply to: iamthevirus

If you grew up in the 80s/90s Isn't that the lifestyle you imagined we'd be living in today? I say that because the society you described was exactly the society a lot of 90s kids were hoping for. We had, for the most part, broken past the racial/sexual/political/whatever lifestyle you wanted stigma, really. But intro the internet, then smart phone, then social media. If you examine timelines from 80s upwards then you see an evolution towards the things described, then a de-evolution after and of said things. At least that's what I see.
I do, however believe this next generation will usher in what is to come next, and it will be a "savior." But that's a whole other topic. My point in sharing that is, I do think you are partially correct... And a time of peace will come... Then the sh** will really hit the fan.

originally posted by: AOx6179

If you grew up in the 80s/90s Isn't that the lifestyle you imagined we'd be living in today? I say that because the society you described was exactly the society a lot of 90s kids were hoping for. We had, for the most part, broken past the racial/sexual/political/whatever lifestyle you wanted stigma, really. But intro the internet, then smart phone, then social media. If you examine timelines from 80s upwards then you see an evolution towards the things described, then a de-evolution after and of said things. At least that's what I see.

I can agree with these statements, the internet is suspect... we were doing much much better than they are now.

I do, however believe this next generation will usher in what is to come next, and it will be a "savior." But that's a whole other topic. My point in sharing that is, I do think you are partially correct... And a time of peace will come... Then the sh** will really hit the fan.

I would like to add something to my last statement on that post.
To my millennial and gen z fam,
I really do admire these generations because they are extremely astute, very very smart. They are noticing "cracks in things" that my generation seemed to not notice. These generations are pulling on the bs threads of pretty much everything and are exposing truths that needed to be revealed. Like the work force for one. They are re-inventing it, and that are right. Things needed to change. I also love and admire the fact that they are so tolerant of things that should have already been accepted as, let people be who they are. They embrace the variety of life and are holding to a love one another type of mentality. They addressed the bullying issue with brass stars. They are generations that are changing things that needed to be changed and especially in the not hating others because they're different. I see a lot of love for each other in these aspects of life. And they will change the world, no doubt, for the better. But sadly I see how TPTB are actually using all that against them, in a way I haven't fully been able to explain yet (working on it). But I see the dark side of it and how the same forces that used everything against my generation are going to use this, new, more vast form of tolerance against them. And yeah, the new gender/sexual "revolution" (what I'm calling it) will be the path they (TPTB) will use to indoctrinate that having sex with children is "totally normal." And one door will open another, then another, then another. And I think it will lead to a darkness we can't imagine. I hate to be so gloom, but I really do fear what is around the corner that we can't see.

But to my gen z/millennials, you are all awesome, and keep at it! Change the world for as much of the better as y'all can! Hoorah

originally posted by: TDDAgain
It's the media, toy factories and Hollywood movies as well as games that do this to our children. Violence is glorified constantly.

But parents are also to be blamed. I grew up in a time where "killer games" were made responsible for the rampages that started in early 2000 in the US and my own country too. I played Counter-Strike (the original one) daily in a clan and I didn't turn out a psychotic killer machine. Also played with and against my uncle and it was always competitiveness, not "killing guys".

But it has to come from somewhere when a 6 year old thinks it's fine to fire a gun at anyone.

Studies refute the video games cause aggression. Killer games? what are those?

a reply to: yuppa
"Killer games" is a literal translation of the German word that was used in our media. It's a word the media/politics choose to manipulate the feelings of the people hearing it

The plot thickens.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

They probably just opened the top flap of the backpack and looked inside as opposed to rummaging through the thing thus discovering what was at the bottom.

a reply to: andy06shake
Is that how one usually does a search for a gun in a bag?
If someone is hiding a gun they are hardly likely to put it on the top.

a reply to: yuppa
Which studies?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Is that how one usually does a search for a gun in a bag?

If there are multiple kids being searched, and they are all elementary school age, i don't really see staff members or security making them empty all the contents of their backpacks out in the entirety and going through the contents with a fine toothcomb.

Think about it Itisnowagain, how hard would you choose to search a 6-year-old for firearms?

Keep in mind the school in question had metal detection capabilities yet seems to have chosen to not use them.

If someone is hiding a gun they are hardly likely to put it on the top.

That may depend on whether or not they wanted to be able to access the weapon at a pinch, or in a hurry, i suppose.

However, nobody is suggesting the gun to have been at the top of the bag.

Depending on the type of backpack, and the fact that they tend to contain multiple different compartments, the weapon may not even have been in the main compartment.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

They probably just opened the top flap of the backpack and looked inside as opposed to rummaging through the thing thus discovering what was at the bottom.

I am more concerned about the supposed "report" of the possibility that the child was carrying a gun.

If it was suspected, how was it not addressed "immediately"?

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

I am more concerned about the supposed "report" of the possibility that the child was carrying a gun.

If they knew about it beforehand and failed to retrieve or confiscate the weapon that is indeed atrocious!

If it was suspected, how was it not addressed "immediately"?

I don't have a clue, maybe it was addressed, but just not in any sort of appropriate manner.

You would imagine all the same if they thought the child had a gun then he would have been searched accordingly.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Sounds like it was "addressed," but they couldn't find the gun. You can't do much to a person on the basis of a tip unless you find actual evidence. If you could, another kid could get mad at him over something minor, call in a fake tip, and get him expelled.

I'm a fan right now of the "alternate compartment" theory that andy06shake posed. Probably no one searching expected to actually find anything and probably forgot to search a compartment. Either that, or maybe when they searched a friend of his had the gun. He was showing it off when the shooting happened, after all.

Kids, even at that age, are good at knowing when the adults are up to something. Maybe he realized they were going to ask him about the gun and gave it to a friend to hold on to.

Either way, he obviously was trying to keep the fact he had the gun under wraps some, which indicates to me that he knew he shouldn't have it. That in a legal sense lessens any issues with the mother; she obviously didn't hand him the gun or imply permission for him to take it, or he wouldn't have tried to hide it. I'm going with poor understanding of firearm safety coupled with a headstrong kid at this point.

Concerning, yes, but still nowhere near as reckless as Alec Baldwin.

TheRedneck

By the way, another thing that just occurred to me... we are hearing a lot about the mother (it was her gun, she's lawyered up, etc.) but not one word about the father? Where is the father in all this?

Sounds like this kid came from a broken home on top of everything else.

Can we talk about this? It's just not possible for any single parent, be they male or female, to raise a child by themselves. Just cannot be done. Either they will be unable to make a reasonable living to provide for the child, or the child will suffer from a lack of attention. Heck, it's hard enough to do in a two-parent home with both parents working!

And before anyone takes that wrong, yes, it has happened... but it is the exception, not the rule. Children form broken homes typically are either poorer or have more social issues than those from two-parent homes.

Bottom line: if we expect to raise well-adjusted children, we have to go back to the nuclear family construct and allow people to make a living wage so it's no longer absolutely necessary for both parents to work outside the home.

So far, it seems we have a headstrong child from a broken, single-parent home (hence the child is going to be headstrong), not living in poverty but then probably suffering from a lack of attention (more indication of why the child is headstrong), a mother who is uneducated in the finer points of firearm safety (education issue) who inadvertently allows the child to take her new handgun to school, where he shows it off to his friends (taboo effect, which I have mentioned many times as part and parcel of the education issue), and is only versed in the use of it enough to know, from TV, movies, and video games, to point and pull the trigger to make people stop what they are doing (education issue again).

That's two, only two issues, that led to this tragedy. Resolving either one could have stopped this: had the father been an integral part of the child's life, chances are the child would not be as headstrong and would not have wanted to take the gun. If he had still wanted to take the gun, there would have been two people to watch him instead of one. If the mother had been better versed in firearm safety, she would not have left the gun idle with a chambered round and pulling the trigger would have had no effect. If the child had been better familiar with firearms, he would likely not have been as excited to break the rules and take that "cool" gun to school to show his buddies.

What would not have prevented this tragedy is

• More regulations on firearms... the mother went through all the proper channels and obtained the gun legally
  
• Stricter background checks... there was nothing in her background to indicate a problem.
  
• Requiring a gun safe to be used... we have no indication one wasn't used and the kid didn't just find the key. Also, the woman obviously bought the gun for a specific reason, and since it is a self-defense gun that reason can be assumed to be crime. Having a gun in a gun safe, as I have already said several times, means it is useless for self-defense. Even if it was on her person, that could mean it was in her purse, which a headstrong child can open and retrieve the gun from.
  
• Stricter punishments... the child at age 6 had no concept of going to jail for shooting his teacher. Kids at that age don't think about such things.

We're going to have to take the hard paths back to a freer and more polite society if we want to stop the killing. There is no other way.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
By the way, another thing that just occurred to me... we are hearing a lot about the mother (it was her gun, she's lawyered up, etc.) but not one word about the father? Where is the father in all this?

Sounds like this kid came from a broken home on top of everything else.

You really must understand the demographics of the Newport News/Portsmouth region, it's a 54% majority African American population and Hispanics are counted among the Caucasians when deciphering demographic data now.

2-3% is about ideal, by the time your community hits 4-6% crime rates increase, property value takes a hit... at 7-10% we begin to see gentrification and white flight ect.

We're talking 54% here...

a reply to: iamthevirus

I reject that.

Crime is not a result of race, period. Crime is a result of culture. Almost all of the mass shootings in recent years have been by Caucasians.

Take away hope for a better life from any one people, of any skin color, any nationality, any race, any creed, and one sets the foundation for a crime-riddled, failing culture of violence.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: iamthevirus

I reject that.

I don't think it's so complex...

Teacher; timmy! why did you shoot me?
.
.
Timmy; but you knew I was a snake.

Given I've been in the exact area quite a few times I'm gonna be that jerk who asks... "girl what you doing down in the hood?"

a reply to: TheRedneck

Could simply be shes an authority figure and she's the wrong color.

Given how deep anti-white animosity is running these days.

/all things being equal