The Detroit Free Press reports:
Ethan Crumbley, who 11 months ago penned in his journal “I will cause the biggest school shooting in Michigan’s history. I have fully mentally lost it,” pleaded guilty Monday to first-degree murder and terrorism charges for the bloodshed he vowed to carry out at Oxford High School four days after his parents bought him a gun.
In a packed courtroom filled with the victims’ grieving families, Crumbley, 16, took responsibility for the murders of his classmates, Tate Myre, 16, Madisyn Baldwin, 17, Hana St. Juliana, 14, and Justin Shilling, 17, and the injuries he caused to seven others who were struck by his bullets.
In entering his guilty plea, Ethan dropped a bombshell that may hurt his parents in their separate criminal case, telling the judge that the gun he used in the shooting was easily accessible. “It was not locked,” Ethan said in court, contradicting his parents’ claims that the gun was properly stored in a secure area.
Read the full article. Crumbley’s parents, you will recall, let authorities on a manhunt after the shooting.
Michigan School Shooter Pleads Guilty To Murders -JMG
Scottie's Playtime 
And three more deaths. This time in St Louis.
What’s the Republican Answer. Train children in ‘Responsible Gun Use’ and have a gun into each classroom, like a fire extinguisher?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Regrettably, there are those who think this way …
LikeLiked by 2 people
Presumably not familiar with the terms
Cross-Fire
Friendly Fire
Accidental Discharge of Weapon
Poor Aim
Bad Fire Discipline
Probably not. In Denial of Course.
And here’s a quote from Micahel Herr’s ‘Dispatches’ concerning the random and accidental violence in a weapons heavy environment:
“the whole rotten deal — could come in on the freaky-fluky as easily as in the so-called expected ways. You heard so many of these stories it was a wonder anyone was left alive to die in firefights”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hello Nan. You are correct. But the idea that a good person with a gun stops a bad person with a gun has been totally disproven. Not that it matters at this point. The public has become so ingrained to be afraid and to think they need a weapon to protect themselves even to go to the grocery store or a fast food place. It has become a cultural issue, where you stand on gun safety rules depends on what tribe you claim membership in. One side will not allow even storage laws. Every study shows that a gun in the home is more dangerous to the people in the home than an intruder would be. But the gun manufactures now market colorful guns to little boys and girls, republican political candidates not only do advertisements with the biggest guns they can pretend to shoot, but they pose for pictures with even their youngest children holding or wearing guns. At this point most people have given up on controlling guns now that the republican trump judges say that even having serial numbers on guns is not legal. Now the drive is to figure out how to live with the situation without turning the US into Hati or Central Americas that are hell holes to live in with gun gang violence that people are willing to walk thousands of miles to get aways from. Hugs
LikeLike
We have a gun measure on the Oregon ballot (Prop 14). As I’ve mentioned before, my other-half is a hardcore supporter of gun ownership and has “requested” that I vote against the measure.
Ordinarily, I would just scan the contents of the issue and vote as I felt led, but in this case, I read the measure word-for-word, PLUS I read all the (many!) pro and con statements. It’s hard to describe the reasoning used by the “cons.” So much emotion and so little facts.
In any event, I’ll not say how I’m going to vote. I’ll let you use your imagination.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello Nan. A decade ago, or more I remember watching a Sunday news show where the interviewer asked an NRA official why they fought so hard against any and all gun safety regulations no matter how minor or sensible. I remember the answer and it showed the future coming. The answer from the NRA official was that they couldn’t have any regulations or controls on guns / gun ownership because it would open the door to more regulations. It would get people used to the idea of regulating and restricting guns that could spread and become more widespread. They felt it would be a fire that would grow and spread they couldn’t stop. So they ingrained that idea into a lot of gun owners over the last 20 or 30 years. The old slippery slope argument the religious fundies have used during the 1960s sexual revolution and they used against same sex marriage saying that if two men could get married then the next thing would be men marrying house pets and children. It is a bad argument anytime used because it shows the arguments against something has no substance to it. I looked up and read Prop 14 and I hope it passes. It makes sense to me. Hugs
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello Roger. The republican response is to attack trans kids and gay kids. Start a war against the LGBTQ+ community and any media they are represented in. Being LGBTQ+ is not causing mass death in schools, guns are. But they refuse to even address guns because that generates profits, big profits that then trickle down to the elected official as bribes called donations. In the US the republican idea of what government should be is: The government must always serve the wants of the wealthy / big business but must never work for the lower income / poor people / nor supply the needs of public. This creates a desperate large portion of the population willing to accept any low wage and work in any unsafe condition just to be able to survive. Something businesses need if they are to extract the most profit out of the system as possible. They then convince the people that the US is god’s chosen country and always exceptional, the number 1 in everything so people won’t look at other countries to see how much the people have it and how the government works for the people in those countries. The US only 50 years ago was a pioneer of development and sent men to the moon. In the 1950s a single income could support a entire family in comfort and luxury while the government supported great schools and higher education. The wealthy / large businesses paid the largest tax burden supporting the government and they could afford to do so while still making profit so getting richer. Then things changed, big money took over the government with Reagan, and shifted the tax burden from the wealthy who could afford it onto the lower incomes who couldn’t. To support that shift the government kept cutting revenue and giving the public treasury to the wealthy, claiming it helped everyone, which was a complete lie. That is where we are at today. Unfortunately the wealthy are doing that all over the world, trying to turn the world into a dystopian wealthy playground with a downtrodden public to serve them. Hugs
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree Scottie.
The problem is how to convince folk with very little that action against this abuse does not impinge on their freedoms
LikeLiked by 1 person