Apr 22, 2015 8:39:24 GMT -5 adamwarlock2099 said:

Apr 21, 2015 11:03:01 GMT -5 DE Sinclair said:

Hate to tell you, but it's pretty much already here. Wisconsin, along with a bunch of other states, have "concealed carry" laws on the books that lets almost anyone (who can pass a background check) get a permit to carry a gun almost anywhere. So far schools and churches are still off limits, but not much else.

As to who left the child unattended, the news reports have glossed over that. All they've said was there was a party of some kind going on at the apartment.

We have concealed carry laws already passed here in Oklahoma. I had a former coworker that took the class and passed. Carried his 9mm handgun in his truck console at all times. I know lots of people are concerned, and I am too, to some degree about the availability of firearms. But I have also lived in St. Louis, both at my folks house and when I moved out, and neither were "suburbia" my any stretch, and yet never once did I feel threatened by guns. But it has happened. My apartment when I moved out on my own was in Ferguson . The Quicktrip that was trashed in the riots I worked at in the late 90s. I think I'm more worried about the killers, the human killers that do these things, no matter what the weapon, even their fists, over the opportunist criminals. Though I do feel that agitated and scared/angry a criminal might escalate a robbery or some other crime to murder a lot easier with a gun than a knife or other melee weapon. And this uncle seems like the type that would have done whatever, gun or not, to the driver. A killer is a killer, no matter what they use. And like a drunk driver, the car is not the killer, it is but a tool, as is a gun, it's the person using it that is the killer.

The real tragedy is that the news has forgotten the real crime, (but hopefully the law and the courts won't) in that the parents weren't watching their child, which led to the loss of two lives. I'm not perfect by any means as a parent. I can share that my youngest, at 5 years old then, was brought to me one summer day by two police officers. (My oldest 9, then, I had walked down to a friend's house where he was with his friend and their mother.) I was working nights, my wife was working at the time, and I fell asleep after being up all night and morning watching a movie with him. So I know it happens. I know we are all human and capable of mistakes. But if the news source is correct and they were just preoccupied with having fun to not notice their child was missing, that I think is the difference. The officers checked out the house on the spot, and questioned me. We had DHS agents come check the house about once a month, four times after that, to ensure that we still had measures to keep the children locked inside the house where we couldn't get out. That still leave alleviate the feeling of failure to protect and care for my children.

I agree, the beginning of the whole thing was the kid not being properly supervised and running out into the street.  But realistically, there's no way the news or the police are going to focus on that.  If they're perceived to be going after a family that just lost two children, the public would crucify them.  Doubly so considering the family is African American and relations between the police and African Americans are pretty shaky right now.

Obviously you know about Ferguson, but you may not have heard about a similar situation that occurred in Milwaukee last year.  A mentally ill African American man, Dontre Hamilton, was sleeping in a park downtown.  A nearby Starbucks called the police thinking he was homeless.  An officer showed up, woke him, and thought he saw a suspicious lump in his pocket so he patted him down (which was a violation of police protocol).  Hamilton freaked out, grabbed the officer's baton and started hitting him with it.  The office then shot him 14 times, killing him.  Turned out Hamilton was unarmed (other than the baton).  The officer was not charged as the killing was deemed justified, but was fired for violating procedures in doing the pat down.  The family organized protests, while the officer tried to get his job back.  Last month they finally had a hearing on it and the Police & Fire Commission upheld the firing.  Frankly I wondered why he even tried to get his job back because, regardless of any facts involved, there was no way any politician would have voted to re-hire him.  It would have been political suicide.

Apr 22, 2015 10:50:03 GMT -5 adamwarlock2099 said:

Apr 22, 2015 9:48:00 GMT -5 DE Sinclair said:

I agree, the beginning of the whole thing was the kid not being properly supervised and running out into the street.  But realistically, there's no way the news or the police are going to focus on that.  If they're perceived to be going after a family that just lost two children, the public would crucify them.  Doubly so considering the family is African American and relations between the police and African Americans are pretty shaky right now.

Obviously you know about Ferguson, but you may not have heard about a similar situation that occurred in Milwaukee last year.  A mentally ill African American man, Dontre Hamilton, was sleeping in a park downtown.  A nearby Starbucks called the police thinking he was homeless.  An officer showed up, woke him, and thought he saw a suspicious lump in his pocket so he patted him down (which was a violation of police protocol).  Hamilton freaked out, grabbed the officer's baton and started hitting him with it.  The office then shot him 14 times, killing him.  Turned out Hamilton was unarmed (other than the baton).  The officer was not charged as the killing was deemed justified, but was fired for violating procedures in doing the pat down.  The family organized protests, while the officer tried to get his job back.  Last month they finally had a hearing on it and the Police & Fire Commission upheld the firing.  Frankly I wondered why he even tried to get his job back because, regardless of any facts involved, there was no way any politician would have voted to re-hire him.  It would have been political suicide.

And of course that's another obstacle to justice that we as a species have allowed to flourish. And considering race/gender/religion in the actions of a person, just retards justice for those that need it or have been wronged. We as species are so locked up on these irrelevant aspects of a person that, I would agree with you as regards the media, knowing this information now. But it shouldn't matter in a perfect world. <1> The man that hit the child, I assume white now, got out of his car to check on the child. He was obviously concerned with what happened and possibly distraught over the child. He certainly didn't need to be gunned down. He didn't act as though he was guilty of something and/or indifferent to the child's condition. And now, out of his concern, he pays with his life. And because there have been wrongs against African Americans from white Americans we have to tread lightly on something that should be pretty open and shut.

I vaguely recall that incident, and it indeed is the reason for the above mentioned need for "tack" when dealing with race relations. <2> Even if Hamilton was armed with the baton, 14 shots to stop him is excessive to the extreme. IF he even needed to fire his gun, one maiming shot would be enough. And whose to say that would even have been needed? <3> Did he give Hamilton a chance to surrender the baton before actually firing his gun? Or did he just mow him down with 14 shots? <4> Was the officer racist? <5> Did he go about the breech of protocol because Hamilton was African American? Or just because he felt threatened? I don't know more than you've shared, but it is a testament that even a "authorized" gun user can make bad decisions. Guns are an immense responsibility that we as a species still haven't seemed to appreciate. Sure we've been killing each other since God put us on Earth, or as we evolved, whatever you believe in, but guns have brought a whole new level of violence to our species. But because we were killing each other before guns, guns aren't the real problem, we as a species are. Guns just make it easier, and I am not always sure, when I think about it, what can be done with guns and society to stop or slow the killing down. I don't know if there is anything to be done, as long as people don't think twice about taking someone's life for anything other than self preservation. It is why I feel, at least the one thing I can do to help, is not ever be a gun owner, even for protection.

I've bolded some of your questions to respond to.

<1> Actually, the driver that hit the child was also African American.

<2> 14 is a lot of shots, though the evidence presented showed that with his model gun it took about 2-3 seconds to fire all 14 shots.  Nothing was ever said why he didn't try his taser first though.  I would think non-lethal would have been the first thing to try.

<3> From testimony presented, there wasn't a chance to try to get him to surrender the baton.  The officer had already been hit several times and the hitting was continuing.

<4> Obviously can't read the officer's mind, but there was no evidence presented that he had ever shown any racist tendencies or made any racist statements.  Hamilton's family does believe it was racially motivated.

<5> There was evidence that suggested that Hamilton was profiled as homeless and that the officer assumed homeless people were armed and dangerous.

As you say, the casual attitude with which people kill one another is the main problem.  As to guns, I've never owned one, felt the need for one, or intend to ever own one.  If nothing else, studies have shown that a gun in the house is far more likely to be used by an intruder than the home owner, or to be used in an accidental shooting.