School finds gun on 6 year old when they helped him adjust his sagging pants

[proud2BlibKansan]

VICTORVILLE • A 6-year-old took a loaded gun to school that went unnoticed until it slid down the leg of his sagging pants while he was in the administration office, officials said Thursday.


Deputy Kathy Vale, a school resource officer, responded to Discovery School of Arts in the 13200 block of Amethyst Road on Wednesday after school officials found that a first-grade student had brought a loaded .45-caliber gun to school, San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Victorville station officials said.


The child was sent to the office by school officials because of his sagging pants, sheriff’s officials said. An office attendant was assisting the child with his pants and belt when she noticed something slide down his pants leg and found that it was the weapon, said Karen Hunt, spokeswoman for the Victorville station.


Investigators discovered that the gun, which the child took from his father’s vehicle, had been stolen during a November 2008 robbery, officials said Thursday.

more . . . http://www.vvdailypress.com/news/victorville_10305___article.html/gun_brings.html

[sakabatou]

1. My reaction to this:

O.o? What. The. Fuck?

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. As an elementary teacher I can assure you we don't normally look for weapons on our kids

We also have no metal detector so it would be relatively easy for one of our kids to bring a gun to school just like this kid did. And with the growing number of idiots who are not only parenting but also buying guns, I expect many more of these kinds of incidents to occur.

[Libertyfirst]

43. I think the term you want it "breeding," not parenting. n/t

[timtom]

73. I couldn't have expressed it any better.

[ZombieHorde]

2. Some people should not be allowed to own firearms.

This kid's father should no longer be allowed to own firearms.

eta: '

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Shh

Second amendment crowd will invade this thread anytime now.

[Cirque du So-What]

8. Yeah, they're in a rare snit tonight

Expect a pantload of righteous indignation.

[FLAprogressive]

15. funny that gun grabbers are complaining of self-"righteousness"

seeing as Brady gun grabbers are some of the biggest self-righteous losers around.

[Cirque du So-What]

20. I have no idea who you're referring to

but I've never advocated gun-grabbing in my life...unless they're in the possession of people who are barred by law from having them or if they're found in the baggy pants of children while at school.

[Skittles]

48. always the fucking same

nuts on extreme sides of the gun issue :puke:

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. Yep can't wait to hear them defend a 6 year old bringing a gun to school

That ought to be good. :)

[jmg257]

23. Hmmm...I got nothing. I hope you can wait - might just have to wait a looong time on this one ;)

[FLAprogressive]

24. no one is defending that -- but this thread is sure to turn into a Brady circlejerk

with Brady people using this as support for their draconian gun law proposals.....

[LanternWaste]

64. It's usually six of one, and half a dozen of the other...

And a "circle-jerk" for the relaxation of firearm restrictions crowd.

It's usually six of one, and half a dozen of the other-- each side intractable and with God on their side...

[jody]

33. I'm a pro-RKBA Dem and neither I nor any pro-RKBA DUer would "defend a 6 year old bringing a gun to

school".

Are you totally ignorant of the many aspects of the natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable right to keep and bear arms for self-defense that you can make such uninformed assertions?

[proud2BlibKansan]

38. But I am sure you would defend his family's right to own those guns

and we can see how that worked out, cant we?

[jody]

56. Apparently his father was a criminal and could not legally own a firearm. On the other hand you

oppose any law-abiding citizen owning a firearm for self-defense, don't you?

[proud2BlibKansan]

67. Yes I do

I work in one of the most crime infested areas in my city. 30 years now. Never once have I needed a gun for self defense. Never once. But I can tell hundreds of stories of tragedies caused by guns. Once you see people you know dying it tends to change your perspective.

[jody]

69. OK don't exercise your RKBA while other law-abiding citizens exercise RKBA. That's every

law-abiding citizens decision for all rights that government is obligated to protect.

You can rant all you want but SCOTUS says the 2nd protects individual RKBA and before long SCOTUS will rule that the 2nd is incorporated in the 14th.

You can remain bitter as a loser or get used to law-abiding citizens exercising their natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable right to keep and bear arms for self defense.

[proud2BlibKansan]

70. Yes I will remain bitter about people dying needlessly

You nailed it there. And you reveal much about yourself as well. :)

[jody]

72. If you are truly "bitter about people dying needlessly" then you will lobby against all causes not

just firearms.

I respect your position and promise not to use my firearms to defend you if you are attacked by a violent criminal.

Have a good day and remember when attacked by a criminal and seconds count, police are only minutes away. :hi:

[proud2BlibKansan]

75. You don't know me

I do lobby for many causes. I also stand in the street protesting against the war twice a week. Started with Vietnam and have lobbied and protested against war ever since.

I the last couple months, I have helped organize rallies supporting equal rights for gays and for the people of Gaza.

I lobbied hard against concealed carry in 2 states.

So yes many causes here.

The biggest difference between you and me, though, is I don't fear being attacked by a violent criminal.

[jody]

78. Apparently you fear being attacked by a law-abiding citizen but not criminals. That's weird. n/t

[-..__...]

49. Yes... you're quite right...

we gun owners have always been strong advocates of children stealing stolen guns from their felon fathers.

[proud2BlibKansan]

68. And your proposal to prevent these kinds of incidents is _________?

[slackmaster]

87. How about enforcing the law that prohibited the father from having a gun?

Would you be OK with that?

[slackmaster]

86. You won't hear anything of the kind from me

Only outrage that an adult failed to properly secure a dangerous weapon.

[Raskolnik]

89. So it's been a day--how many people have defended a 6yr old bringing a gun to school?

And was it good?

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. dupe

[jmg257]

11. Yep - I hate the "pro-rights" crowd...no place for them on a progressive web site!

:sarcasm:

[jody]

18. Pro-RKBA is a progressive position, anti-RKBA types don't belong on a progressive web site. n/t

[FLAprogressive]

27. I love it when they rail on FISA but salivate at an assault weapons ban.

unconstitutional is unconstitutional

whether it's a violation of the fourth amendment or the second.

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. Cause we all know that every 6 year old in America should be able to take Dad's gun to school!

:sarcasm:

[jmg257]

28. Is that even legal? Thought 18 & 21 were legal ages for handgun possession?

Doesn't sound like a good idea to me to make it younger.

I do have a problem with "gun free school zones", but that has little to do with this case w/re:age and stolen guns.

[proud2BlibKansan]

30. Cause shooting people is such a progressive value!

Hell, we all ought to be carrying guns to prove how progressive we are!

:sarcasm:

[jody]

34. Obviously you are are ignorant of the Second Amendment that protects the natural, inherent,

inalienable/unalienable right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

You really should study the history of and current status of the 2nd Amendment before you try to participate in informed discussions of RKBA.

[Paladin]

45. Why Don't You Give All The Folks A Sample.....

...of your notion of an "informed discussion" of the ACLU, Jody? Let's hear it---your honest-to-God opinion of the ACLU, as articulated so many times down in the Gun Dungeon. I dare you.....

[jody]

57. Happy New Year Paladin. Your Resolution must be to remain as ignorant as always re RKBA and oppose

the most basic natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable right, the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

To honor your opposition to RKBA, I promise not to use my firearms to defend you if you are attacked by a criminal.

[bread_and_roses]

47. hhhmmmnnn....why do I never see that "well-regulated militia" part in any of the "gun rights" posts?

It is always so conspicuous by its' absence.

[-..__...]

51. Late to the party, are'ye ?

"District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ___ (2008) is a landmark legal case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for private use. It was the first Supreme Court case in United States history to directly address whether the right to keep and bear arms is a right of individuals or a collective right that applies only to state-regulated militias."


"The core holding in D.C. v. Heller is that the Second Amendment is an individual right intimately tied to the natural right of self-defense".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

You need to get out and enlighten/educate yourself a little more... willfully buying into the Brady bile will rot your brain in due time if taken too seriously.

[bread_and_roses]

53. nope, not late at all, I know about it

I also know that it does not prohibit reasonable regulation - and there is a good bit of lee-way in reasonable. Nor, as I recall, is it unheard of for a decision by the SCOTUS to eventually be - redone(?) - not sure of right word.

I find it fascinating that the "gun rights" crowd on THIS forum so trumpet a decision by THIS particular Court, one so reviled on most other issues. I also find the general tone of the "gun rights" crowd quite fascinating, in its' heavy-handed sneering superiourity - reinforcing my suspicion that those who are married to their gun "rights" have serious issues around self-worth and self-actualization, giving rise to an arrogant, blow-hard bullying affect that probably masks a deep timidity, fear, and feeling of inadequacy. Probably among the last people I'd ever want to be around - with a gun or without it.

[jmg257]

54. "there is a good bit of lee-way in reasonable" would explain the major

trumpeting of the Court's decision by pro-rights people.

Those who favor gun related rights have been hearing the intentional or ignorant attempts at dumbing down of the 2nd amendment & constitution for so long that it was nice to have the USSC back up what most of us already knew, that the the 2nd secures the right of the people, primarliy for use in militia service (sort of outdated as ori intended), but also for all private individual lawful uses (never outdated).

I would surmise that any "bullying affect" that really exists also stems from constantly having to defend their basic rights from those who would take them away - for reasons only THEY think are "reasonable", no matter how non-sensical. No real excuse - but a reason none the less. Rights are VERY important. Legal backing of this right in this country is a major..."victory", and is easily seen as a way to help stem the anti-gun bullshit.

Now if you could explain why anti-gunners are so smug, or worse, why so many need to lie to promote their ideals?

"Deep timidity, fear and feelings of inadequacy" - would have to be addressed on individual basis. I know fear is a good thing - keeps one from doing all kinds of stupid things. Timidity? Inadequacy? Wouldn't know. Most gun people I know, including those 'up here' seem about as normal and imperfect as a group as every other group.

[bread_and_roses]

55. I live in the Country. Nearly everyone owns shotguns, nearly everyone

hunts. None of them seem to spend ten minutes worrying that someone is going to "take away" their guns. Now, no one in my household hunts, and I dislike the mentality of killing animals for "sport," but the people I know eat their kill and given the explosion of the deer population due to our modifications of the environment I find that I can't quarrel with taking deer. But - as I say a big but - none of them run around terrified that someone is going to take their "guns."

Sorry, but regardless of how reasonable you sound - although I notice you couldn't forgo that "lie" in there - I have nothing but contempt for those who think that a handgun is a personal necessity or who defend their "right" to own semi-automatics, or whatever they are (I have no interest in the arcane explanations so beloved by the gun "rights" crowd of what a "machine gun" is - we all know what we are talking about). I will continue to think that the need to have and defend owning such weapons is a pathetic fixation. I usually stay as far away as I can from your crowd, but I usually read threads about children, which is how I ended up in this one. I well-remember the defense of the man who's son managed to kill himself because the idiot parent allowed him to handle a weapon far too powerful for him, and the rabid defense of "teaching" small children to handle weapons. That, for me, typifies the "gun rights" brigade - their "rights" above all sanity or even the lives of their own children. So there is really no point in talking to me about it - I'm not about to change my mind, neither are you, and now I've vented a bit, prompted by this being about a child, I'm done.

[jmg257]

62. Fair enough then - we'll both stick to our guns! Discussion over.

Just never assume that gun owners favor their rights over the life of their children, I would bet that in most cases you are wrong. More then likely most gun owning parents have a position that favors having both guns and children, but if a choice HAD to be made - children would come 1st. The issue is that there is no good reason people should be forced to make that choice simply because "you" think they should. One would have to think that gun ownerhsip and use must always be more dangerous then many other normal enjoyable items/activities where people die tragically, and that just isn't the case.

Of course real life has tragedies, and not just related to firearms. Which is exactly where teaching kids safety comes in...of all types. Teaching them about guns because of your knowledge that guns will be around. Teaching them that fires can occur if you play with matches. Teaching them to swim so they don't drown. Teaching them to wear their seatbelts when in a car. Always giving them understanding that proper respect, use and awareness of dangerous items/activities is more likely safer then ignorance. Indeed there IS perhaps also a thought of "it won't happen to me/my kids". All good parents could think like that, understandable as long as they do all they can to make things as safe as possible, while realizing you are not going to raise your kids in a bubble.

Also, I would expect that often enough being a gun owner actually made one's children safer, as violent crime has a way of affecting children too. I do know that I grew up with guns in the house, and I never once thought/think I was in danger from them, and often I felt safer because I had access to them when old enough. I do know my quality of life was better, and is better now because my son and I, like my Pop and I, share an interest in firearms. I also enjoy the fact that I have firearms availble for defense on myself and my loved ones should the need arise.

That is what rights are about - being able to make your own choice, as long as that choice doesn't infringe on the rights of others; and so it is with gun related rights. Hopefully everyone will do everything they can to make their choice a safe and enjoyable one - for everyone.

[Statistical]

61. You are aware that ALL nine justices agreed that the 2nd is an individual right?

Where they dissented on was how constitutional was DC law.

Not one of the nine justices believe in that "collective militia right" argument that has been thoroughly been destroyed by legal scholars for years.

There was NO question among any of the justices. The 2nd is an individual right to keep and bear arms.

[jody]

58. Why don't you read SCOTUS opinion on D.C. v. Heller, link, below and treat your ignorance.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

[rrneck]

79. People pointed to the National Guard for years

as the "well regulated militia" referred to in the second amendment, until they were sent overseas on a mission of imperial resource theft. That's why we haven't heard much about it.

[immoderate]

83. You need to educate yourself as to what "well regulated militia" means.

There's a discussion of it in the Federalist Papers. It does not mean restricted.

--IMM

[jmg257]

35. Ahh - so guns are only for shooting people? Mine must all be broken. Or

maybe they are just VERY progressive guns.

YOU can choose to carry guns for any reason YOU want, assuming the legality; rights are great, aren't they? I don't do so to prove anything at all.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

36. Real progressives do

[Raskolnik]

81. Just out of curiosity, would you dismiss the ACLU as the "First Amendment crowd?" n/t

[jmg257]

5. The gun was stolen in November, don't think his father was supposed to have it! But he no longer

should be, IF he was allowed to legally own them before this incident.

See - common sense gun law we can all agree on...violent felons should not have the right to own guns - stolen ones or otherwise!

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. But he did indeed have a gun. In fact he had several guns.

Sounds like that common sense gun law isn't very effective, is it?

[jmg257]

29. Most aren't, we already know that. But this is one that actually makes sense, whether it is

actually effective or not.

It is when you start trying to legislate guns away from lawful citizens that they get non-sensical. No sense at all to infringe on the secured rights of 98.8% of the population because of the possible unlawful acts of the rest.

[NV Whino]

6. Sounds like daddy stole it during a robbery.

Little bubba may have inadvertently turned whistle blower.

[skepticscott]

7. Some people

should not even be allowed to breed...

[ZombieHorde]

13. Like the Hungarians!

(just kidding, I am Hungarian)

[LeftyMom]

52. Seriously!

Me too. Well, half.

[madeline_con]

12. That should keep him from acquiring any more stolen ones.

:eyes:

[ZombieHorde]

17. (what was that, above you)

[jody]

14. Lewis or Johnson were convicted felons and could not legally own a firearm. n/t

[lurky]

19. I prefer not to wade into holy wars,

but it was a stolen gun. The father either took it in a robbery or bought it on the street from someone who did. Thus, he was not allowed to own this gun. Hell, someone this stupid surely has a criminal record, and would probably be barred from owning any handguns, stolen or not.

[proud2BlibKansan]

44. That record didn't keep him from having a gun though, now did it?

[Statistical]

63. I am confused are you admitting gun control doesn't work?

That the entire premise is flawed?

Laws are obeyed by citizens who are lawful.
Felons are inherently not lawful.
Felons are unlikely to follow the law as related gun control.
Gun control only restricts rights of the law abiding.

[proud2BlibKansan]

65. No it doesn't; it needs to be stricter

It blows my mind that a 6 year old took a gun to school and the response is "well, his dad was breaking the law by having that gun". And if someone had been shot, you all would have said the same thing. People die and the response is this proves gun control doesn't work.

Unbelievable.

[petronius]

41. Sounds like he didn't so much "own" the firearm as steal it

I imagine there's a whole bunch of things he won't be allowed to do for the next decade or so...

[Statistical]

59. The father never had the right to own the firearm in question

Anyone happen to notice this?

Investigators discovered that the gun, which the child took from his father’s vehicle, had been stolen during a November 2008 robbery, officials said Thursday

So:
1) kid brings gun to school
2) kid reports gun from #1 was in dad's car
3) police determine that gun from #2 was STOLEN.

Any ideas on how "dad" happened to acquire a stolen weapon?

Well lets read on.
Lewis <"dad"> and Johnson were arrested for receiving stolen property and possession of a firearm by a felon, authorities said, and both were booked into West Valley Detention Center.

If dad is a felon how did he "own" a weapon to begin with? Felons are prohibited from owning weapons. So it is impossible for him to have a weapon in his car. Thank God for gun control; it prevented this kid from bringing a dangerous weapon to school.

Wait a second, your telling me criminals don't follow the law. Someone who has no problems stealing another persons property won't responsibly keep firearm from children. Well I am shocked.

Ironically the gun incident took 2 violent criminals off the street, likely will result in convictions, and ended in the recovery of stolen goods, and the closing of a robbery/burglary case.

If anything I would give this kid an award (and a mandatory gun's are dangerous course).

[ZombieHorde]

91. I never claimed that he did.

[timtom]

74. Especially stolen ones.

[ZombieHorde]

93. Of course, few should have stolen guns.

[JerseygirlCT]

92. Absolutely. nt

[lurky]

9. Poor kid. He's going to have a tough lot to overcome.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

37. If the kid was living with a father like that, what shape is the mother in

Scary for the child

[jody]

10. Lewis or Johnson was a convicted felon and could not legally own a firearm. I hope they are

incarcerated for the maximum but that's unlikely given CA is broke and releasing prisoners early.

[aikoaiko]

16. If the father had a stolen gun, then he's ready for prison.

[proud2BlibKansan]

31. Sounds like he has already been there

Time for another stay.

[marshall]

32. I wondered what the point of those saggy pants were

Lord knows what's being hauled around in all those baggy, saggy, and draggy pants.

And what's the teacher supposed to do? As "Is that a pistol in your pocket, or are you just happy to be in my class?"

[McCamy Taylor]

40. I think originally they copied Honk Kong action films. Baggy hid the padding they used for stunts.

Easiest way to hide a weapon is under a coat, not in your pants.

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. It began in prisons

http://www.snopes.com/risque/homosex/sagging.asp

[spin]

80. As an individual who has a concealed carry permit...

I've often admired the utility of modern "gangsa" dress.

You could hide an arsenal in the "baggy, saggy, and draggy pants".

Of course you would have to wear a belt, which might ruin the effect.

[McCamy Taylor]

39. I can't even defend his right to lift and fire this thing (cause at 6 he cant do it). What a joke.

Handguns and rifles need locks just like cars have. If autos did not have keys, we would see a lot more kiddies driving off in them, too.

Fire arm safety is a no brainer. Gun locks. Gun licenses that include course work and a police administered safety test like a driver's test and insurance for gun owners. If you need it to own and operate a car, you should need it to own and operate a gun.

[proud2BlibKansan]

42. I think gun locks should be mandatory in all houses with kids

[Statistical]

60. I agree... ALL felons should lock up their illegally stolen firearms or face penalty from the law

Think something like this will work?

Felons who steal other peoples guns should either:
a) force the legal gun owner to provide a gun lock at gun owners expense
b) demand a free gun lock from the state.

I mean we all KNOW that someone who has
1) committed some other unnamed felony in the past
2) committed robbery/burglary
3) was a felon in possession of a firearm (another felony)

So even if we started a "free locks for felons" programs what is the % chance (0%-100%) do you think that someone who committed 3 felonies (i.e. breaking the law) would follow the law?

[jmg257]

46. I wouldn't count on his age to keep him safe. Someone stupid enough

to allow him access may have also left it locked and loaded (not unreasonable for what may be a 1911).

Wouldn't take much effort at all to fire it.

[-..__...]

50. Hmmm...

I just checked my handy dandy pocket reference book of the US Constitution and nowhere did I find any cites that a right should be legislated the same as a privilege.

Sorry... try something else.

[Goblinmonger]

84. So there are no limits

on free expression? Interesting. I always thought there was a whole shitload of case law on that issue, but I guess I'm wrong.

[Renew Deal]

66. Plaxico's kid?

:shrug:

[FourScore]

76. Scary.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

77. My 2¢

proud2Blib, Do You think all guns should be outlawed? That is what you seem to suggest. Please correct me if I am wrong - there is a lot going on in this thread and I may have gotten the wrong idea.

Obviously, the case cited is extreme and the family who allowed a kid to take a gun to school is made up of morons who should not be allowed to own any sort of firearm.

I have strong feelings about taking away guns from people who are diligent and cautious. I think you know me and my background well enough to consider my point of view on this topic.

Do you want to know why my husband insists we have guns? Not because we are enthusiasts --- We have them to protect ourselves from our GOVERNMENT - when they finally do declare martial law. We have them to protect our family when a disaster strikes, could be a massive earthquake or maybe a dirty bomb - That is when it is quite conceivable that gangs of thugs will go from house to house to take what they can and who intend to do us harm. We have firearms and ammo because when the depression happens and people become desperate they may think we are sitting ducks and they can just help themselves to our food, water and property. Our guns are here for protection. Period.

My children will never find a loaded gun in our car or sitting on the coffee table next to the latest copy of Penthouse while Bill Dance Outdoors fishing program blares in the background while I field dress a deer on the porch while downing a six pack of Coors.

But I do respect the 2nd amendment and feel totally within my right to keep guns safely in my home.

The guy in the story, Bubba the Wonderass, he should be put in a cell for a week or two to think about his gun ownership privileges as they are unceremoniously removed.

[Javaman]

82. that was more like a buck fifty. ;)

cheers!

[slackmaster]

85. The school should update its dress code to ban sagging pants

They look shitty anyway.

[Ex Lurker]

88. No, dress codes banning hip hop style clothing are racist

and a direct slap at African American culture.

[slackmaster]

90. There is nothing racist about requiring a common standard of dress for all students

Don't be silly.