Kid threatens to kill 23 students and a teacher

More puzzling, under what authority did they confiscate them?
Click to expand...

I worked a similar case at a local school recently that I can't go into to much detail on. However during such cases lots of folks cooperate with police. We had a voluntary permission for search and seizure from the guardians.
 
This as a fairly short article, and did not include any quotes from the father. It is entirely possible that the father is cooperating with the police and consented to having the guns out of the house until after the situation is more stable; in that case, the word "confiscated" may be less appropriate than to say that the guns are in the custody of the police.

I don't have any more insight into the situation than is given in the article, but I also don't place much trust in the media's willingness to report such incidents in a complete and unbiased manner. At this point, I don't think I really have a reason to be upset. If the father has a secure means of storing his guns and tries unsuccessfully to get them back, I will have a problem with it. If he is focusing on his kid's mental health and doesn't want the guns in the house at the moment, the police could well be helping him and the community out a great deal, and the media reports are twisting it. Just can't tell.
 
RedBowTies88 said:
The people who actually shoot up schools don't email and let them know first.
Click to expand...

You wanna bet 24 lives on that theory?

That kind of thinking is exactly what allows these things to happen. Almost invariably, after an event, there is a great outcry that there were so many warning signs, so many comments ignored, so many people "knew" and did nothing.

We can't take those chances. People will learn to stop making stupid comments. The ones who "mean it" will continue to give warning signs.
 
I am very happy to hear that a disaster was avoided, lives were saved. I would also like to hear that the father did cooperate with the police and after everything is sorted out he gets his guns back.
 
You wanna bet 24 lives on that theory?

That kind of thinking is exactly what allows these things to happen. Almost invariably, after an event, there is a great outcry that there were so many warning signs, so many comments ignored, so many people "knew" and did nothing.

We can't take those chances. People will learn to stop making stupid comments. The ones who "mean it" will continue to give warning signs.
Click to expand...

I'm in no way saying to do nothing or ignore such a threat, i'm simply saying this to the people who believe 24 lives were saved by this seizure. Is it possible thats the case? Of course, but in my opinion the chances of that actually coming to fruition were very slim.

as opposed to the incidents where armed security stopped an assiliant in which case I believe that loss of innocent life was indeed imminent
 
In all the arguements I hear in this thread, I am missing one really big question....

Exaactly WHY was this kid so upset with the teacher and the class and what is being done to address that?

I have a very big problem with the police siezing the dad's property because of what they kid said.

Consider: Kid is mad at the teacher and other kids. Kid sends email to the school and says he is going to run his dad's Cat D8 bulldozer through the school (stealing a Cat D8 is much easier to do than breaking into a gun safe).

Are the cops going to sieze the dad's D8, and ruin his dad's livelyhood, just because he has a mad and mouthy kid?
 
If stealing and using bulldozers is so much easier than using guns, as many claim time and time again, why does no one do it? It's very possible that the dad gave up th guns because he was scared of what the kid would do. We can't cry foul on every story tangentially involving guns, it takes away credibility.
 
Different now

Man, back in the day, the state would have made that kid disappear. Now, the blame will land anywhere. What part of locked in a safe is not secure?
Lock it up! That is what kept the guns out of this poor misguided child!
Let's not underplay what a powerful tool a safe is!
 
That analogy is... not analogous.
Click to expand...

My point being that threats are not actions, and in this type of scenerio rarely turn into actions. So it is important what rights and liberties we conceed in the name of stopping something that could happen as opposed to something that is in the process of happening.

Again I'm in no way suggesting this kind of thing to be taken lightly, BUT was the confiscation of his fathers legal and secured guns really necessary if that is indeed what happened? In my opinion it was not.
 
My definition os "secure" is that NOBODY has access other then myself. A safe is nothing more then a small closet if somoene else has the key/combo
 
it's very possible that the dad gave up th guns because he was scared of what the kid would do.
Click to expand...

I find it far more likely it's a Father's attempt to cooperate in order to gain some leniency for his son.

Come on guys, think it through. If your boy sent some boneheaded email to someone at school wouldn't you do everything you could to show the authorities and the school that you could deal with it, your son isn't psycho, just needs his ass whipped, (within reason of course). To keep my son from getting run through a huge ringer, may be losing my parental guardianship of him. I would be a helpful stand up guy too.
 
My point being that threats are not actions, and in this type of scenerio rarely turn into actions.
Click to expand...

In some places threats are crimes separate from following through. In my parts threatining to shoot people at a school and it being communicated by public access is terrorist threats.

§40.1. Terrorizing

A. Terrorizing is the intentional communication of information that the commission of a crime of violence is imminent or in progress or that a circumstance dangerous to human life exists or is about to exist, with the intent of causing members of the general public to be in sustained fear for their safety; or causing evacuation of a building, a public structure, or a facility of transportation; or causing other serious disruption to the general public.

C. Whoever commits the offense of terrorizing shall be fined not more than fifteen thousand dollars or imprisoned with or without hard labor for not more than fifteen years, or both.
 
A 7th grade student in Poway sent an email to a school administrator over the weekend threatening to shoot a teacher and 23 students on Monday morning.

After detectives investigated the boy’s house, they found numerous rifles and handguns.

The threat was sent to an administrator at Twin Peaks Middle School on Friday night. The email referred to 3,000 rounds of ammunitions and explained the types of firearms he planned to use during the shooting.

A teacher referenced in the email was confused about why the student included her and referred to her by name, while the students were unnamed.

“I kept asking myself, ‘Why me?’ Literally wracking my brain trying to figure out who it is,” she said.

Though the student sent the email anonymously, detectives worked with the Poway Unified School District and San Diego’s Computer and Technology Crime High-Tech Response Team to identify where the email came from.
Click to expand...

If true this kid should be hammered by the judge so badly, he's put UNDER the jailhouse as a warning to others. This nonsense has to stop.
 
There's a good chance that the threatening email was sent from one of the computers in the house. Without knowing which one, the prudent thing for the police to do in gathering evidence to build their case is to seize all of them.
 
Not only should have all the computers in the house been confiscated but any cell phone with computer capabilities as well.

Just as history has taught us to take someone threatening suicide very seriously, IMO, history by now, should have taught us to take these terrorist threats just as serious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top