A 14-year-old boy in California allegedly used ‘multiple weapons’ to kill parents, injure sister, police say
A 14-year-old boy in California allegedly used ‘multiple weapons’ to kill parents, injure sister, police say
A 14-year-old boy has been arrested after allegedly killing his parents and severely injuring his 11-year-old sister at their home in a rural community in Fresno County, California, on Wednesday, authorities say.
A 14-year-old boy has been arrested after allegedly killing his parents and severely injuring his 11-year-old sister at their home in a rural community in Fresno County, California, on Wednesday, authorities say.
The suspect, who is not being identified because of his age, originally called the sheriff’s office after the double slaying and told them someone had broken into their house in Miramonte, attacked his family, and fled in a truck, Fresno County Sheriff John Zanoni said during a news conference Friday.
Detectives later noticed inconsistencies in the boy’s story, according to Zanoni.
“Evidence ultimately showed that he had fabricated the story of a break in and was responsible for using multiple weapons to attack his mom, his dad and his sister,” Zanoni said.
You're viewing a single thread.
Obviously we should ban all weapons because of this outlier case
If you view each case separately they are all outliers.
If you look at the US vs nearly any other developed country you’ll see trends in gun crimes and how would you explain those?
Gun nut's gonna gun nut, logic need not apply
I prefer to give these newish accounts that throw a hand grenade into the comment sections a chance to explain their position and clarify their comments.
Most never do.
I appreciate that, genuinely.
But this troll straw-manned the gun control argument to "banning all guns" -- their position is stupid.
And the thing is, at this point whether that stupidity is either willful, or obtuse, they're not changing it.
I care less about the original commenter changing their minds and more about the people reading it later who might somewhat agree with them.
You can either have a comment chain calling them an idiot that cements it being us vs them, or you can have people trying to engage in good faith and the original comment not being able to back up their position.
Yeah, there's times where asshole comments from a position I agree with tempt me to change my position. Some people are so bad at debate that they generate new opponents. Insulting or summarily dismissing a position also catches anyone who thinks there's a good point worth exploring in the crossfire.
Good point
Leaping to absurd hyperbole isn't an argument, it's absurd hyperbole.
But... MUH FREEDUMS 😢
Their freedom to make society pay for their right in body count.
You're right, we should do literally nothing..
Yeah, we should. But let's compromise and put safeguards in place instead. Like background checks, registration to monitor over eager purchasers, and generally restrict the ability of someone to take the life of a other.
In Canada we have gone to extreme lengths on gun control, specific to handguns. You can take a restricted firearms course, allowing you to own handguns, and other restricted arms.
The rules go something like this. If you own a handgun, the government can come and check on you at almost any time. You must keep it locked in a safe. You must keep ammunition in a separate room. If you plan to take the handgun to the range, or anywhere outside of your home, you have to contact the government for approval and establish a timeline.
I may not be 100% accurate on those laws but that is the gist of it. The idea is to cut down on firearm related crimes.
Now answer me this. How is that cutting down on crime at all, other than punishing lawful gun owners. How many people that caused death or injury with a handgun, took a PAL course to legally buy it? My gut says little to none. Those who commit the crimes buy handguns illegally.
It may be a sort of bias, but fuck me have there been way more shootings in my locale lately. Drug and gang related but still.
Those handgun permits aren't just a matter of applying and taking a course and then you can have a handgun. As I understand it, they grant them to specific professions, like law enforcement and trapping.
Which means people aren't able to legally carry pistols around, which means it's risky to do so, which means that not many do so without a specific intent, which means there's less random gun crime because someone happened to have a hidden gun in the heat of a moment where they were briefly pissed off.
And those random inspections and storage rules aren't meant to prevent legal owners from doing any violence. If one decides to do so, there's not much those rules will do to stop them. But they will make it less likely that some other random person who hasn't been vetted can get ahold of that gun. Usually there's some kind of violent intent or intent to service a violent intent when guns are stolen, so making it painful to leave your guns in a position to be easily stolen can make a real difference.
This makes sense. You are able to apply for a license to carry a pistol, however chief firearms officers are denying them, regardless whether you meet criteria or not. The RCMP also will not disclose how many permits for carrying a handgun they issued on a given year. Fun facts.
Yeah, I'm sure it does nothing.
Not related, but how many school shootings did you guys have up there in 2023? Is firearms the number 1 cause of death for Canadian children? Because it is in the US.
Who needs actual statistics when you have anecdotal experience, right? Just trust your gut.
Firearms are not the number one cause of death for children...this bullshit was stirred up by having children mean 1-19 for firearm deaths and 1-15 for car deaths. It's still cars...the pandemic caused a slight outlier and everyone jumped on it. People didn't drive in 2020 much at all, of course deaths dropped....and suicides went up because surprise...no one was getting out.
I know it's a difficult statistic to accept. It's hard to believe.
But yeah no. I haven't seen anything to indicate that these statistics are inaccurate in any way.
How many school shootings did we have in 2016 comparatively? How many of you actually live in Canada and watched the news about these stories unraveling after 2019?
I'm not saying that GUN CONTROL BAD GUNS GOOD as much as you guys are portraying it that way. I asked how is it cutting down on crime and one of about 15 comments actually had a logical response to that without being a dick about it.
I completely agree the US needs to change some things but what I'm asking is are the 1.5-2 year old laws made in Canada actually cutting down on gun violence in Canada? Because what I see first hand is no change.
The laws you’re taking about are much older and the ones you’re thinking about haven’t been made law yet.
I linked an article that shows the actual numbers but I can’t do much about how you feel.
I mean this in the most polite and conversational way possible but what you are saying is wrong.
October 21 2022 a national freeze on sale and transfer of handguns was placed. It is still in effect today unless you take a restricted firearms course.
The article you linked me does in fact show that the US has a gun violence problem, which I believe should be rectified. How? I don't know.
Your article makes no mention of handgun/restricted weapon (automatic rifles) crime statistics decreasing after 2022, which is what I am getting at.
If you own a handgun, the government can come and check on you at almost any time. You must keep it locked in a safe. You must keep ammunition in a separate room. If you plan to take the handgun to the range, or anywhere outside of your home, you have to contact the government for approval and establish a timeline.
All these laws were in place in 2019.
2022 changed some rules on buying or transferring ownership of restricted weapons.
I stand corrected by several years, but again, I don't think recent amendments 2019+ has reduced crime. Our government has taken lawful gun owners, and are trying to take their weapons away. No criminal who owned a handgun is going to go and turn in their weapon that they may use in a crime.
Edit: take a look at this link https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2022001/article/00009-eng.htm
It is firearm crime statistics from 2009 to 2021. I would like to see up to 2023 but it isn't there unfortunately. I see no correlation to 2019 law amendments and decreasing crime. Except for maybe robberies. Which I would have expected to increase with COVID and unemployment. That being said perhaps there hasn't been enough time passed to reflect the law changes via statistics.
It’d be far more helpful to ban the type of ignorance that people like you possess.
We should and its not an outlier case.
You can't say ban ALL weapons. It's not even specified what weapons were used. Could have been any household items. The focus should be on mental health. The kid obviously had problems and no one to help him.
Nah. No one has ever said that. They have, however, suggested regulating certain weapons that have been involved in many of the 559 (as of nov 30) mass shootings in the US in 2023, and requiring extended background checks and waiting periods.
Good job on sharing a contrasting view to the top comment. Not saying you're wrong - I don't know. But I share the aforementioned comment - appreciate this as a tragedy first and possibly wait for clearer details before injecting politics into it.
I hope these outliers affect you at some point.