Utah Sixth Grader Brings a Gun to School and Other Gun-Related Shenanigans

Yesterday, a Utah sixth grader brought a gun to school to protect himself from a Newtown-esque mass shooting, or so he claimed. He brandished the weapon in front of some friends at recess, as gun-toting 11-year-olds are wont do, and, pointed it at a girl’s head and threatened to kill her (according to one report.)

Fantastic.

The boy has been detained on assault and weapons charges, but considering that most states want to arm teachers, and lunatic libertarians like Megan McArdle want to train students to bum-rush assailants, I say this kid was just being enterprising (minus all the “threatening to kill little girls” part.)

It’s not like we have a problem with gun culture in this country, if that’s what you’re wondering. This kid was simply holding it down until Utah comes to its senses and joins the ranks of States That Want to Turn Elementary School into Militarized Zones™.

Sure, it sounds like things might have gotten a little out of hand at recess, what with the brandishing of the gun and the threatening to kill people, but what’s an 11-year-old boy to do? These things happen.

An 11-year-old Utah boy who said he brought a gun to school to protect himself from a Newtown-style attack, then brandished the pistol at three classmates during recess, has been detained on assault and weapons charges, a school spokesman said on Tuesday.

The boy, a Utah sixth-grader, took the unloaded .22-caliber handgun to his school south of Salt Lake City in his backpack on Monday, a spokesman for the Granite School District said.

Some ammunition was also found in the backpack, but it did not appear to go with the gun, said the spokesman, Ben Horsley.

~snip~

The 11-year-old student at Utah’s West Kearns Elementary, who was not publicly identified, has insisted he brought the gun to school to “protect himself and his friends from a Connecticut-style incident,” Horsley said.

However, the boy is accused of waving the gun at three classmates on a soccer field during recess. Later on Monday, one of those students and a second classmate alerted their teacher, who “immediately took the student into custody and took him down to the principal’s office,” Horsley said.

Wonderful. Kids are bringing guns to school because they think they need it for protection. And instead of practical solution, Republican and libertarian wackaloons are advocating doing away with gun-free school zones, arming teachers (oh hai Tennessee Rep. Frank Niceley (R-Rambo)); arming more teachers (take a bow, Minnesota Rep. Tony Cornish (R-Sweet Stache)); and introducing sensible gun control legis- — just kidding — arming teachers some more, because it’s the only way (here’s looking at you, Oklahoma Rep. Mike McCullough (R-Lock ‘n Load)).

I give up.

[cross-posted at ABLC]

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit






53 replies
  1. 1
    bemused says:

    Tony Cornish is a piece of work. He proudly wears a handcuff lapel pin.

  2. 2
    Elie says:

    An 11 year old is not so young not to know this is not a good thing to do. The first thing that I want to ask is “what is going on this kid’s home?” This might be exactly the kind of child that is at risk for problems… we need to get behind these case studies beyond the superficial indignation. The words “quiet desperation” come to my mind…

  3. 3
    Butch says:

    You know, I’ve actually been in a situation where guns were drawn and many shots were fired (a good friend was killed) and I want to tell you that lightly trained amateurs are the last people you want packing heat in that situation.

  4. 4
    Lee Rudolph says:

    Not that I didn’t know that there was something a little wrong with me, but I swear that I read take a bow as in be prepared to shoot arrows at ’em.

  5. 5
    Mudge says:

    Atrios said something the other day in a very short post that brought some perspective to this for me. He said many of his gun nut friends (he implied male) had fantasies about confronting the bad guys (and they so fear their chosen bad guys, be they Muslim, black or anything else) and blowing them away; being a hero. All of this arming the school business is typical of wingnut/gun nut transference of that hero wish. If they were the teacher and armed, Lanza would not have been able to do what he did. They simply cannot comprehend that most people have no such wish, as they fail to comprehend anything not of their world. They assume all of us are like them. In their world of course, they would be the hero, not just a pistol toting victim of a guy with a semiautomatic rifle.

  6. 6
    General Stuck says:

    The world’s ugliest pig fucking gun nut. Jeebus, this dude makes Lapierre seem like Mother Theresa.

  7. 7

    The kid’s just a little ahead of his time. Have patience, kid, I’m sure after we have a few more horrific massacres, that some states will start militarizing hall monitors.

    “Respect mah authoritay!”

  8. 8
    Xboxershorts says:

    If we armed our teachers to the teeth, maybe so many politicians wouldn’t be so quick to publicly demonize them, defund them, steal their pensions or call them overpaid babysitters…

    So, hell yeah, lets arm all teachers!!!!

  9. 9
    Petorado says:

    It’s insane that people are actually promoting the idea of engaging in “Gunfight at the OK Elementary School” firefights between shooters, teachers, students, and whomever else wants to pop off a few caps. Like wild crossfire and adding to the confusion of the “fog of school shootings” won’t increase the body count, especially if the McArdle lemming strategy is employed.

  10. 10
    Groucho48 says:

    Any charges pending against the parents?

  11. 11

    Assault charges? The kid is 11 years old. Great. We live in a country where psychotics can easily get machine guns, and then, when a scared, confused 11 year old child does something dumb, we charge him with assault. I guess if we’re going to have to stay true to the kind of country we’re becoming, we should lock him away for life, or maybe even put him to death. Sometimes I want to just give up on the U.S. and leave for good.

  12. 12
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Elie:

    There are some reports that the kid’s parents encouraged him to bring the gun so he could protect himself at school. So … yeah.

    I’m still convinced that the next step is that the gun nuts will propose that we arm the kids. McMegan’s only error was not going far enough, obviously. After all, if we can’t trust 7-year-olds with guns, who can we trust?

  13. 13
    General Stuck says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    I’m still convinced that the next step is that the gun nuts will propose that we arm the kids.

    Well, that would certainly keep everyone on their toes.

  14. 14
    Ohio Mom says:

    @Elie: I agree. Let’s hope the school is calling in child welfare, etc. And let’s also hope the girl he threatened is getting some counseling right now.

  15. 15
    Ohio Mom says:

    @Elie: I agree. Let’s hope the school is calling in child welfare, etc. And let’s also hope the girl he threatened is getting some counseling right now.

  16. 16
    mapaghimagsik says:

    He was compensating for a tiny wee-wee?
    ETA: an armed playground is a polite playground.

  17. 17
    retr2327 says:

    Clearly, better gun training would have improved this situation. At least then, the kid would have brought ammo that fit. Schools are not teaching our kids properly . . .

  18. 18
  19. 19
    gvg says:

    Yep first reports I saw made it seem like the kids idea out of fear due to the Ct shooting on TV. Later report I think yesterday said it was the parents idea. I’d say they were the ones needing investigation.

    As for charging the kid-well I think the school/local police had to do that at the begining in order to hold him but if it was mostly to do with parents they can drop the charges against him. There are more than one possible scenarios that could have turned out to be the real truth and considering the “fog o media sensation breaking news” I’m still trying to remain in wait and see mode. Story might change a few times in next few days and media be all wrong.
    Paranoid idiot parents fits some of my preconceptions so I might be too inclined to believe it…

  20. 20
    Origuy says:

    From the Bloomington [IN] Herald-Times, today:

    An MCCSC [Monroe County] high school student has been suspended after he was accused of making a comment suggesting he would create an incident at Bloomington High School South like the shootings in Connecticut last week.

    Police determined the student had access to various weapons at his home, though they were not owned by the student. Police were told ammunition for the weapons was secured in a safe.
    __
    After the interview, police made arrangements for the student to receive “an evaluation.”
    __
    On Tuesday, detectives obtained a search warrant for the student’s residence and removed two rifles, two shotguns and two handguns, along with ammunition. The search warrant was secured under Indiana’s Jake Laird Law, according to police, which allows for law enforcement to remove weapons “from those who could pose a threat.”

    I think the school acted reasonably in this case, suspending the student, but no charges have been filed yet.
    Jake Laird was an Indianapolis cop who was killed in 2004 by a schizophrenic whose confiscated weapons had been returned to him after a previous encounter with Indy police. At the time, the cops had no legal authority to hold them.

  21. 21
    beltane says:

    @Origuy: A national Jake Laird’s law would be a good start.

  22. 22
    Punchy says:

    You missed Missouri. They introduced a bill to make arming teachers mandatory, I believe.

  23. 23
    sheithappens says:

    Stay tuned for self described ‘former Republican’ Christie lover Cole posting about how Gov. Johnson, Limbaugh, Hannity, and Inhofe have some good ideas about this.

  24. 24
    David in NY says:

    They “detained” the kid on criminal charges? I mean jailed him? That’s nuts too. Get the gun. Get the kid counseling. Get the kid’s parents counseling. The criminal “justice” system shouldn’t be the catch-all for every social problem. It isn’t equipped to deal with this stuff.

  25. 25
    David in NY says:

    @sheithappens: “stay tuned’

    Sorry. Changing channels on you. Jerk.

  26. 26
    johnny aquitard says:

    Wonderful. Kids are bringing guns to school because they think they need it for protection. And instead of practical solution, Republican and libertarian wackaloons are advocating doing away with gun-free school zones, arming teachers

    If your goal is to undermine people’s faith and trust in our public school systems so you can replace them (and the teachers’ unions) with vouchers for homeschooling and private academies, then it all makes sense.

  27. 27
    jharp says:

    The kid is lucky the teacher wasn’t armed and possessing an itchy trigger finger.

    At what point do you shoot when you see a kid with a gun pointed at another kid’s head?

  28. 28
    Meg says:

    @Petorado:
    And Jeffrey Goldberg has a piece defending McArdle’s stupid idea, claiming it was originally an idea from DHS and some schools.
    He ignored that in those cases, it was suggested as a last resort and instead of throwing themselves to the gunman, one should throw objects at him(I prefer fire extinguisher), whereas McArdle suggested it as the only thing we can do.

  29. 29
    Feudalism Now! says:

    The kid was charged with assault because he brandished a deadly weapon at another students head and threatened to kill the student. He committed assault. Also, without criminal charges, there is no way to enforce that the child and parents get counseling, evaluation and follow up. Charging a child with a felony when they commit a felony is not a problem. Sentencing a child like an adult for said felony is a mistake, but a crime is a crime, developing brain is a mitigating factor for sentencing.

  30. 30
    FridayNext says:

    @jharp:

    Itchy-trigger finger?

    I would say shooting someone who is brandishing weapon and threatening others is exactly what should be done. If there was an armed teacher near by who DIDN’T shoot I would say that person isn’t doing his/her job.

    All of which I am against. But if you are going to arm teachers or other school staff against this sort of thing, this student would, and should, be shot. I can’t imagine any board of inquiry not thinking that is a “righteous shoot” as they said on NYPD Blues.

    The question for politicians and other people advocating for arming school staff, is are you okay with this? What would you do to the teacher who shot this kid? What about a kid armed with lesser, but very real weapons?

    Nobody ever thinks things like this will apply to their family, until it does.

  31. 31

    @Zapruder F. Mashtots, D.D.S.:
    I just want to say that I would like to make sweaty zombie love to your nym.

  32. 32
    Mnemosyne says:

    @FridayNext:

    I would say shooting someone who is brandishing weapon and threatening others is exactly what should be done. If there was an armed teacher near by who DIDN’T shoot I would say that person isn’t doing his/her job.

    Which, as you said, is the problem with this modest proposal the gun nuts have come up with. The most likely outcome is not that it will stop another mad Newtown-style shooter, but that students will be shot by teachers or administrators. Which will then lead to calls for students to be armed to protect themselves against the tyranny of the teachers and school officials.

    There’s a reason they call it a cycle of violence. It just spins around in tighter and tighter circles until you’re giving toddlers guns in their strollers just in case they need to defend themselves.

  33. 33
    gnomedad says:

    Remember when the conservative mantra was “law and order”? Apparently now the defense of life is government overreach. Individual responsibility!

  34. 34
    Avery Greynold says:

    If only the threatened student had a concealed carry gun she could have “stood her ground” and resolved the issue without any further legal problems. See, more guns are the solution.

  35. 35
    Roger Moore says:

    @sheithappens:

    Stay tuned for self described ‘former Republican’ Christie lover Cole renamed troll sheithappens posting about how Gov. Johnson, Limbaugh, Hannity, and Inhofe have some good ideas about this small his penіs is.

    FTFY.

  36. 36

    @zombie rotten mcdonald:

    My nym is flattered and wants to meet you.

  37. 37
    Paul says:

    @Groucho48:

    Any charges pending against the parents?

    I seriously doubt it. This is Utah after all…

  38. 38
    Roger Moore says:

    @Feudalism Now!:

    The kid was charged with assault because he allegedly brandished a deadly weapon at another students head and allegedly threatened to kill the student.

    FTFY. We have a couple of students claiming that the kid with the gun pointed it at them, which he denies. That he brought the gun to school is fairly clear; that he actually committed assault is contested.

  39. 39
    Yutsano says:

    @Zapruder F. Mashtots, D.D.S.: Sheesh. What happened to taking your nym to dinner first? :)

  40. 40
    Feudalism Now! says:

    @Roger Moore: Hence charged not convicted. Mea culpa, I should have placed the allegedly. I blame tablet typing and ADHD. But the point is the same, charging the child with the crime for alleged actions brings a lot more heft to the seriousness of the situation. Boys will be boys does not accomplish anything. Leniency in sentencing, but let the system run its course.

  41. 41
    mapaghimagsik says:

    @jharp:
    Stand your ground?

  42. 42
    Roger Moore says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    The most likely outcome is not that it will stop another mad Newtown-style shooter, but that students will be shot by teachers or administrators.

    This. Also, too, you can bet that the guns will not be restricted to defense against armed assailants. Teachers will start using them to break up arguments and fights between students, then to intimidate students who are disruptive/unruly/disrespectful. Pretty soon, a lot of students will dread school even more than they do now because the teachers they hate will be armed and explicitly threatening.

  43. 43
    Elie says:

    @Zapruder F. Mashtots, D.D.S.:

    I am hoping that his “arrest” might actually give the authorities the opportunity to look see what is happening at the ole homefront and possibly get this kid (and his family) some assistance. Court ordered therapy is paid by the tax payer — at least for a bit. It also helps “tighten up” Ma and Pa a bit — and they would otherwise be flying under the radar, doing their dirt…

    Of course, maybe I am being too hopeful…

  44. 44
    David in NY says:

    Negotiations? What Negotiations?

    “Boehner: I Hope The President ‘Will Get Serious Soon’”

  45. 45
    Redshift says:

    Don’t forget arming principals! That’s what my governor, Bob McDonnell, suggests, and warns people not to have a “knee-jerk reaction” against it. Because his idea isn’t at all a knee-jerk reaction. Republican “I know you are but what am I?” politics at its finest…

  46. 46
    Heather says:

    Too bad the teacher wasn’t armed. She could have blew his brains out while claiming to be a hero who saved the kids from a massacre.

  47. 47
    artem1s says:

    @Roger Moore:

    Pretty soon, a lot of students will dread school even more than they do now because the teachers they hate will be armed and explicitly threatening.

    Egad, that’s another nightmare of unintended consequences…who in their right mind would want to see the stereotypical Assistant Vice Principal armed with anything more lethal than a wooden paddle. The asshat VP in my Junior High would have thought shooting was a means to end PDA and loitering in the halls between classes.

  48. 48

    @Yutsano:

    My nym is no gentleman, I’m sorry to say.

  49. 49
    LongHairedWeirdo says:

    Um… pedanticism alert: the “bum’s rush” is a way of pitching someone out. I believe it’s one hand at the neck, and one at the belt; you lift them partially by the belt to keep them from being able to get any leverage, and pitch them away – usually leading to a fall, I believe.

    McArdle is suggesting an unarmed human wave assault to overpower an armed assailant. Keep in mind that trained soldiers have a very hard time rushing a position (ed: “held by an attacker with better weapons – e.g., a machine gun nest”). They will, if there’s clearly no other choice (sometimes that machine gun nest *must* be taken, even at hideous cost), and that even experienced troops might break when taking heavy losses, but on the plus side, fully automatic weapons *are* already illegal, so the kids aren’t actually charging a “machine gun nest”.

  50. 50
    graves007 says:

    The only people to blame here are the idiots who yammer on about how everyone and their mothers should be armed. They will of course not take one iota of responsibility when children act on their words. fucking scumbags.

  51. 51
    PanurgeATL says:

    Maybe “I give up” is facetious, but, well, maybe not–under the surface, anyway. Much of the reason we’re where we are socially and culturally is because liberals have given up, and have been giving up for decades. I know it might take a while to break out of that pattern, but let’s be a little quicker with it, hmmm???

  52. 52
    FridayNext says:

    @Redshift:

    Armed principals!

    Like that guy who stripped search a teenage girl who was suspected of carrying an ibuprofen. I wonder what that ass hat would do with a gun.

  53. 53
    Binky Bear says:

    I just realized that McArdle believes our children our Zerglings.

    google search zergling rush for example.

Comments are closed.