I was able to download the pdf of Cruz's interrogation with BCSO before the news outlets pulled the link. All I can find now are excerpts of the transcript. If you want to save yourself some time in locating a new source for the transcript, click on the link (goes to my OneDrive). Having kids and owning firearms, it was quite an interesting read. My takeaway was that if the school and his mom stepped in after he lost the fight in school which resulted in him quitting school, none of this would happen. Depression sucks... talk about it.


Transcript shared from my OneDrive

It was the car, it was the gun, it was the drug. It was not my precious little child, they are simply misunderstood because they are so special, , , , , ,.

-------------------------
Dora Hates You

I have three kids... none of them are prodigies... none of them are superstars... in fact, they are all quite average... I am comfortable with that.

Glib assessments on stuff like this are pointless. There's plenty of research to read if you really want to think about it.

Edited: 08/08/2018 at 04:07 PM by TeeBirdForever

He did it with a gun.
He was a child that was allowed acess to a lethal weapon.
One optimized for quickly killing a lot of people.
He used it for it's indended purpose.

Of all of the factors that went into this, changing one of them would have most surely diverted the flow of history away from this event.

If the kid hadn't had access to the weopon, this would not have hapoened.

-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

Edited: 08/09/2018 at 01:40 AM by WG

Yep, take away the rifle and none of this would have happened... instead he could have driven his car through the crowd at dismissal, set off an IED, barricaded the doors and lit the place on fire, or went to school with a machete. The problem was not his access to the firearm. The problem was the system turning its back to his mental issues.

Like I said, if his mom would have paid attention and sought mental help for him or if the school did a little more than just kick him out, none of this would have happened. My oldest (10yo) is a bit of a troublemaker... when he get's suspended from school he walks around the house saying he is stupid, worthless, maybe he should just die. When schools discipline kids like this, the kid's impression is that the school doesn't want to deal with him. Depression and isolation is the issue and properly assessing this issue is the solution, not gun control.

The same is true with Sandy Hook, Columbine, etc. Sure if you took away the guns, kids would not have been shot, but something else would have happened.

Also, as far as military hardware (AR platform), I can get a 30rd magazine for my Ruger 10/22 and .22 caliber is just a little smaller than .223 caliber. At close range, the .22 would cause more damage because the bullets don't go through the body. There are many non-military, high capacity firearms on the market.

Edited: 08/09/2018 at 05:23 AM by saltydog73

Speculation.

Yes, I am speculating but so are the people who speculate that taking away guns will solve mass causality incidents. Those two kids up in Boston didn't need guns to cause damage at the marathon

Your son is getting suspended at age 10?

-------------------------


When America was "great"

He was actually suspended at age 7... which is another matter of contention because IRC School District has a one punishment fits all regardless of whether you're n kindergarten or a senior... make a threat you get 5d OSS, parents notified, sheriff notified, etc.

Can anyone tell me what 5d OSS teaches a 2nd grader?

I got suspended (2d ISS) in the first grade but that is because my best friend and I embarrassed the nun in church when we screamed while she picked us up by our earlobes.

Edited: 08/10/2018 at 05:43 AM by saltydog73

There is research and literature on the subject. Based on data.

Teebird, to what are you replying? If you are making an argument against guns, please post links to the research. Also, don't post news articles, rather post links for the actual research conducted by respectable sociologists, criminal scientists, etc. that have been accepted for publication in scientific journals after a proper peer review.


If you're interested in reading about massacres that occurred without guns, here are a few links for you:


https://ijr.com/2015/12/487774...no-guns-were-involved/

https://www.commondreams.org/v...ss-murder-without-guns

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/p...n-history-was-gun-free

You can find summaries of journal articles if you are really interested. Try Google Scholar.

If it truly is mental problems like the current federal government says, why aren't they funding mental health issues? The last I saw, they had cut, not increased funding.

Females, suffer the same issues, yet they don't gun down innocent people and statistically speaking, people with mental issues are more likely to be the victim than the aggressor.

80% of these mass murders are committed with fancy black guns, to think there isn't some correlation is simply shortsighted or biased.

-------------------------
I was right.

.

Edited: 08/15/2018 at 01:44 PM by saltydog73

So apparently this discussion has had a few replies from those who think gun control is key in stopping these situations. Here is the un-redacted special report on NC's education history. The highlighted text is what was redacted. His mother allowed him to purchase the rifle. The school's hands were tied when he turned 18 but that is not to say that they did not do everything they could have to handle the situation in his younger years.

First, Cole, I have no idea why the government is cutting mental health funding. Take that up with your elected officials.

Second, WG made the statement that if he did not have access to the firearm, this incident would not have occurred. To some degree that is true but also false. True in that not as many people would have died. False in that the incident would not have happened. You should tell these kid's parents that this incident did not happen because of the gun control they have in the UK: Link. If you read world news, you will see that many of these non-gun incidents happen in countries with gun control.

Teebird, I am still waiting on your research.

What it comes down to, if someone is intent on harming others due to depression or other mental issue, they will do it whether they have access to a firearm of not. Best case, a bunch of people get slashed with a box cutter. Worst case, Boston Marathon bombing or just think about how many people would be injured/dead if some nut decided to drive their car down New Haven during Meg O'Ween. Also, don't think, 'oh I'd just run the other way' because that is what everyone else is doing and now you have a bottleneck. Just read some of the articles from France and Germany when this happened.

Even if the police were able to incapacitate the driver (read shoot him), you still have an x ton vehicle travelling at n rate of speed until it hits a fixed object. If you think you can get out of the way quick enough, you should go practice on US1 to make sure you know what you are talking about... I do as I was hit by a truck travelling 30mph... last think I remembered was hearing the horn and seeing the grill of the 1980's Ford Ranger. I had just looked and the road was clear; in the two steps I took the truck travelled 150ft. There is no diving or running. There is only shock. I was lucky to get thrown over the truck and sustained a broken leg, two ribs, and a punctured liver and kidney. I would certainly be dead if I went under the truck but even so, I've had my Last Rites since no one, from the paramedics to the ER doctors thought I would live.

You just downplayed the danger of guns and amplified violence with vehicles.

How many cars have been used in school murders?

-------------------------
I was right.

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy.html You should look it up yourself though, like I said.

Edited: 08/19/2018 at 10:15 AM by TeeBirdForever

Cole, with regards to your How many cars have been used in school murders question. Yes, I downplayed the danger of guns and amplified violence with vehicles. You are correct in your statement, however, you aren't seeing the bigger picture.

If someone is inclined to act out violently, odds are, they are going to act out violently. How will they do this? Right now, guns are a good option. When I was a kid last century, knives were the go to weapon of choice. Ok, let's propose a perfect world for gun rights advocates. All firearms are outlawed. Since this is a utopian proposal, everyone turns in their guns. There are no guns. Period. Nada. Zilch. What is that person predisposed to violence going to go to? It may be knives, may be poison, may be explosives, may be cars, etc. Do you see the big picture now? There will always be those predisposed to violence. There will always be an object that can be used to cause damage.

TeeBird, I am quite comfortable with my views and opinions. Were you in the debate group in school? Did you ask your opponents to research your view before you tried to sway them to your side? Now, as in good debate, I have researched gun control and all I see is speculation. Sure, in the countries where there is strict gun control, there are fewer gun related acts of violence; but there are still acts of violence. What's interesting about the link you posted is the correlation they make is not a concrete correlation. In fact, did you even read the article? "For four of the outcomes we studied - defensive gun use, hunting and recreation, mass shootings, and officer-involved shootings - we found inconclusive evidence, at best, on the effects of any of the policies." It says if this occurs, this may be the result. Where are the definitive causations?

Guns do not make the depressed (insert other mental issue) person violent. Take away the guns, you do not take away the depression (insert other mental issue) or the violence.

If you don't believe me, how many people have od'd on bath salts (K2)? It is pretty well reported. Why don't they buy weed instead? How many people have od'd on weed? Do you see what I'm getting at? K2 is legal, inexpensive, and relatively easy to acquire. The risks are, you have a 1 in x chance of od'ing and running down the street naked being chased by spiders. Yet those who cannot afford weed or need to take pee tests, choose to take the risk. Guns are like K2... relatively easy to acquire, effective.

Does gun control decrease gun violence. Let's assume Yes. Does gun control decrease violence? Do I really need to answer that?

Stop being reactive to these acts of violence whether a gun was involved or not. Let's be proactive in understanding why some people are predisposed (at some point) to violence and work on that.

Edited: 08/20/2018 at 05:57 AM by saltydog73

Does gun control decrease violence?

Violence that leads to death, yes.

All the data is there if you care to look.

Port Arthur Australia is a good start.

"For four of the outcomes we studied - defensive gun use, hunting and recreation, mass shootings, and officer-involved shootings - we found inconclusive evidence, at best, on the effects of any of the policies."

Look up the Dickey Amendment while you are at it.

-------------------------
I was right.

Edited: 08/20/2018 at 06:24 AM by Cole