United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: 17-Year-Old Says 'I Could Buy an AR-15,' Gets Arrested
Source:
Reason
URL Source: https://reason.com/blog/2018/02/16/ ... gh-school-gun-ar-15-arrest-cop
Published: Feb 16, 2018
Author: Robby Soave
Post Date: 2018-02-17 20:23:47 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1283
Comments: 33
A high school in Ledyard, Connecticut, called the cops on a 17-year-old student who made a non-threatening comment about a gun in class. Police then arrested him, and he now faces charges of breaching the peace. According to Ledyard High School Principal Amanda Fagan, the student said "I could buy an AR-15" or something very similar. That's it. "In an abundance of caution, despite the fact that this student is a minor who cannot, in fact, legally purchase such a weapon, we made the decision to consult with the Ledyard Police, who made the decision to take the student into custody," Fagan said in a statement, according to FOX61. The student made the comment during his first-period class. The principal was quickly notified, and she made the decision to call the cops—even though it was clear to her that he was neither making a threat nor in possession of any actual guns. In a message to parents, Fagan stressed that the student presented absolutely no danger. "The student in question does not have access to firearms at home," she said. "There was never any threat to the safety of your children or the adults who teach and tend to them each day." It's not clear what the tone of the remark was—perhaps the young man was complaining that it's too easy to buy a gun. I called and emailed Fagan for additional clarification, but she did not immediately respond. The Associated Press reports that the student will be appear before a juvenile court to face charges of breaching the peace. "The offense is akin to joking about a bomb in the airport," Fagan said in her message. "One simply doesn't do it." And one shouldn't. But the question is whether someone should face life-altering consequences for doing it. There was no harm committed. There was no real danger. The authorities involved understood that there was no real danger. The kid is being punished anyway. In her statement, Fagan referred to the recent Parkland, Florida, school shooting: In the wake of any school violence, nerves are often frayed. Today is no exception. Many of us—parents, students, educators—faced today with feelings of sadness, anger, even fear as we began to process the news of the eighth fatal school shooting in America in seven weeks. This time, it was 17 high school students and staff members who lost their lives yesterday at a high school in Parkland, Florida. Like every school staff in America today, the staff of Ledyard High School had heightened senses all day, working to be sure our smiles were particularly welcoming, our ears were particularly open, our interactions particularly genuine. Incidents like this—the arrest of a teenager for daring to even mention a gun—are precisely why I've warned that putting more cops in schools and encouraging a see-something-say-something mentality are not reasonable responses to school shootings. These policies make us feel like we did something, but they wouldn't necessarily make school any safer. They're more likely to curtail teens' civil liberties and needlessly draw students into the criminal justice system. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 19.
#7. To: Deckard (#0)
2) despite the fact that this student is a minor who cannot, in fact, legally purchase such a weapon, 1) Have you been high for the last 35 active shooter incidents? LameStreamMedia media automatically goes into ANTI-GUN LEGISLATION mode and the sane part of this republic scream... IF YOU SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING, as an effort to cut down on these incidents. AND THATS WHAT WAS DONE HERE, asshole. Unless you like the idea of more gun legislation? Expect state, local and federal governments to do something. 2) As if we've never had a child, not old enough to legally buy a weapon, shoot up a school before. Gabriel Parker was just ONE. You never run out of YELLA BULLSHIT... in your quest to keep the simple government hating minds of LF permanently in fear or agitated with your endless fucking propaganda.
This situation was no different than a kid being arrested for drawing a picture of a gun, pointing his finger like one or chewing a Pop-Tart into the shape of a gun - stupid liberal zero-tolerance policies that do nothing to promote safety in the classroom - rather it makes criminals out of otherwise law-abiding students. According to Ledyard High School Principal Amanda Fagan, the student said "I could buy an AR-15" or something very similar. That's it. The student made the comment during his first-period class. The principal was quickly notified, and she made the decision to call the cops even though it was clear to her that he was neither making a threat nor in possession of any actual guns. In a message to parents, Fagan stressed that the student presented absolutely no danger. It's not clear what the tone of the remark was — perhaps the young man was complaining that it's too easy to buy a gun. IF YOU SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING
Neither do gun laws, regulations or bans. Which one (gun laws or extreme zero tolerance) would you like this country to take, asshole? You do know that one or the other is coming? The scared snowflake sheeple will not sit around and do nothing, dumb shit.
Why aren't strong educational values more stringently required in order to purchase firearms?
Why don't you shut your big fat chalupa eating maw. Our constitution is very clear, WILL NOT BE INFRINGED. Even stupid people have constitutional rights. This is America... where freedom comes at a cost. That cost is substantial... including the death of children in schools. We stop what we can, and MOVE ON. There is NOTHING that will prevent active shooter incidents... NOTHING. I suggest you grow some thicker skin and un-pussify. Your empathy is the biggest enemy freedom has.
Are educational requirements considered "infringement" to the purchase of a firearm? You know, minor things such as: maintenance, care and storage. You know, little things like: handling, both in publick and private. Tiny things like: local and state laws affecting the use thereof. You know: insignificant points about ballistics, trajectory and handling. I am pretty sure these areas are not considered "infringement."
2) Tiny things like: local and state laws affecting the use thereof. You ask a monumentally stupid question with 1 And then contradict your ignorant question with an ignorant statement, 2. So, YES, dumb shit, legislating ecucational requirements, IS AN INFRINGEMENT.
#21. To: GrandIsland (#19)
You suggest that I am asking stupid questions yet you ignore the tremendous changes in US society since the late 1700s. That is, back in the good ol' days (as an example) when the US was new and fresh with a spiffy Bill o' Rights, society was largely agrarian and having firearms for both personal survival and local business was a requirement to survive. Local, rural societies would often set up competition in firearm's shooting sports to enhance training and proficiency. Of course, you will say ... that can not be since the NRA wasn't around but the fact remains, training and proficiency in the use of a firearm enhanced survival skills whether for personal defense or for the gathering of game. Times have changed. Today, the whole nation has changed from 250 years ago. And we permit firearms to be sold and distributed without required education to support the basics of use and maintenance or local law requirements? I am saying the basics of the Second Amendment for support thereof no longer exists. We need to replace the informal historical roots that no longer exist with formal education.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest1) In an abundance of caution,
#9. To: GrandIsland (#7)
2) despite the fact that this student is a minor who cannot, in fact, legally purchase such a weapon,
#13. To: Deckard (#9)
(Edited)
stupid liberal zero-tolerance policies that do nothing to promote safety in the classroom
#16. To: GrandIsland (#13)
Neither do gun laws, regulations or bans.
#17. To: buckeroo (#16)
Why aren't strong educational values more stringently required in order to purchase firearms?
#18. To: GrandIsland (#17)
WILL NOT BE INFRINGED
#19. To: buckeroo (#18)
(Edited)
1) Are educational requirements considered "infringement" to the purchase of a firearm?
Replies to Comment # 19. legislating ecucational (SIC) requirements, IS AN INFRINGEMENT.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 19.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]