Shooting in Reston

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A school with only 27 teens and 1:3 ratio?

Appears the diagnosis must have been pretty severe, we understand boy was mentally ill, but I wonder what was the daughter's condition to warrant this school?

If both had severe needs, I agree parents should have focussed more on mental stability rather than focus on the Nazi obsession.

+1

The buzzfeed article says that one Buckley’s concerns was how the excessive amount of time her daughter spent on the phone with her boyfriend made her forget her meds, etc.

Quoted PP here. Right, even if this boy was a liberal who loved Jews, he was still bad news. So the Nazi aspect was a red herring.

I also feel the matter should have been discussed privately between school and both sets of parents without involving unrelated friends like the 18 year old in the article or emailing the contents around. Regular discipline methods like curfew, social shaming and grounding probably did not work here.

Both sets of parents likely underestimated the criticality of the situation. It is a no win situation overall.

I would be very interested in knowing how he got the gun, since given that anything could have set off this boy, not having the gun seems to be the only way to have avoided this tragedy.

He didn't need a gun to get into that house. If it hadn't have been a gun it could have been a baseball bat, a knife, a brick or God only knows what else.

But chances are high that, had the weapon been a baseball bat, knife, a brick or God only knows what else, the parents would still be alive today.

The problem is ACCESS TO GUNS and the sheer number of guns that are floating around in seemingly "normal" homes and communities now.

And for that, the NRA and gun manufacturers have blood on their hands.

I dunno. The Manson family didn't need guns to carry out their horrors.

Oh please. The Manson family were professional killers, not some 17 year old idiot yahoo, going up against two adults.

Those parents expected to confront a mouthy kid. They did not expect a weapon. So I don't know that you can assume that another type of weapon wouldn't have yielded the same result. The boy was not mentally well.

I cannot believe I'm spending this time drawing a picture for you but apparently, that's necessary.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a gun. Boom. They're gone.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a baseball bat, brick or other weapon. Altercation ensues. Parents are injured, perhaps even seriously. But there is far more of an opportunity to fight back or turn the weapon on the perp. Baseball bats and bricks are not lethal weapons by definition of existence. Guns are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why would he bring a gun to a house that he wasn't allowed to go to in the middle of the night? Who cares about the altercation? He knew he wasn't allowed there and so did the parents.

He was not mentally well. Maybe he brought the gun as a means to compel the girl to go with him ("If you don't talk to me, I'm going to shoot myself right here on your lawn", "If you don't leave with me, I'm going to shoot myself right here in your bedroom"). Then the parents walked in and all hell broke loose.

If a boy like that was still in my house at 4:00 AM, I'd be in an altercation as well. Why are you not blaming the parents and child who enabled all of this?

The boy snuck into the house with the help of his girlfriend roughly an hour before the shooting. I don't know why the girl let him into her room but clearly she felt conflicted over this parental initiated split up with him and she did let him in. The parents heard something in their daughter's bedroom, went to investigate and the boy shot them. Not blaming the parents for what happened, but that is, in fact, what did happen.

I don't see any of that being in conflict with what I said. The girl did not have rights to the house and she was known to be mentally unstable. She's slightly at fault for letting him in, but he knew he was not allowed. The Lorton parents knew he was not allowed there and knew what he had been up to. No excuse for them. Sorry.

The Lorton parents should have been standing guard over their son because they had reason to believe that he might sneak out to see his girlfriend (he had done so before) and they were aware that the girlfriend's parents didn't approve of that?

Maybe they did check on the kid at 2am and saw that he was in bed. They relaxed, went to bed and the next thing they knew the cops were telling them that he had been involved in a shooting.

Well more will come out on the parents as the story unfolds, however I don't think checking on a kid like that at 2:00 am even if that did happen would be enough and they should have known that. There was a car involved (likely starting from their house) and a gun. Could be wrong on this, but it appears to be negligence on their part.

If the parents taught the boy how to drive and gave him access to a car it was probably intended more to prepare him for his future than anything else. You seriously think that they expected this hell?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A school with only 27 teens and 1:3 ratio?

Appears the diagnosis must have been pretty severe, we understand boy was mentally ill, but I wonder what was the daughter's condition to warrant this school?

If both had severe needs, I agree parents should have focussed more on mental stability rather than focus on the Nazi obsession.

+1

The buzzfeed article says that one Buckley’s concerns was how the excessive amount of time her daughter spent on the phone with her boyfriend made her forget her meds, etc.

Quoted PP here. Right, even if this boy was a liberal who loved Jews, he was still bad news. So the Nazi aspect was a red herring.

I also feel the matter should have been discussed privately between school and both sets of parents without involving unrelated friends like the 18 year old in the article or emailing the contents around. Regular discipline methods like curfew, social shaming and grounding probably did not work here.

Both sets of parents likely underestimated the criticality of the situation. It is a no win situation overall.

I would be very interested in knowing how he got the gun, since given that anything could have set off this boy, not having the gun seems to be the only way to have avoided this tragedy.

He didn't need a gun to get into that house. If it hadn't have been a gun it could have been a baseball bat, a knife, a brick or God only knows what else.

But chances are high that, had the weapon been a baseball bat, knife, a brick or God only knows what else, the parents would still be alive today.

The problem is ACCESS TO GUNS and the sheer number of guns that are floating around in seemingly "normal" homes and communities now.

And for that, the NRA and gun manufacturers have blood on their hands.

I dunno. The Manson family didn't need guns to carry out their horrors.

Oh please. The Manson family were professional killers, not some 17 year old idiot yahoo, going up against two adults.

Those parents expected to confront a mouthy kid. They did not expect a weapon. So I don't know that you can assume that another type of weapon wouldn't have yielded the same result. The boy was not mentally well.

I cannot believe I'm spending this time drawing a picture for you but apparently, that's necessary.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a gun. Boom. They're gone.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a baseball bat, brick or other weapon. Altercation ensues. Parents are injured, perhaps even seriously. But there is far more of an opportunity to fight back or turn the weapon on the perp. Baseball bats and bricks are not lethal weapons by definition of existence. Guns are.

Parents walk in, mentally unstable, angry kid goes berserk and beats them/stabs them to death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A school with only 27 teens and 1:3 ratio?

Appears the diagnosis must have been pretty severe, we understand boy was mentally ill, but I wonder what was the daughter's condition to warrant this school?

If both had severe needs, I agree parents should have focussed more on mental stability rather than focus on the Nazi obsession.

+1

The buzzfeed article says that one Buckley’s concerns was how the excessive amount of time her daughter spent on the phone with her boyfriend made her forget her meds, etc.

Quoted PP here. Right, even if this boy was a liberal who loved Jews, he was still bad news. So the Nazi aspect was a red herring.

I also feel the matter should have been discussed privately between school and both sets of parents without involving unrelated friends like the 18 year old in the article or emailing the contents around. Regular discipline methods like curfew, social shaming and grounding probably did not work here.

Both sets of parents likely underestimated the criticality of the situation. It is a no win situation overall.

I would be very interested in knowing how he got the gun, since given that anything could have set off this boy, not having the gun seems to be the only way to have avoided this tragedy.

He didn't need a gun to get into that house. If it hadn't have been a gun it could have been a baseball bat, a knife, a brick or God only knows what else.

But chances are high that, had the weapon been a baseball bat, knife, a brick or God only knows what else, the parents would still be alive today.

The problem is ACCESS TO GUNS and the sheer number of guns that are floating around in seemingly "normal" homes and communities now.

And for that, the NRA and gun manufacturers have blood on their hands.

I dunno. The Manson family didn't need guns to carry out their horrors.

Oh please. The Manson family were professional killers, not some 17 year old idiot yahoo, going up against two adults.

Those parents expected to confront a mouthy kid. They did not expect a weapon. So I don't know that you can assume that another type of weapon wouldn't have yielded the same result. The boy was not mentally well.

I cannot believe I'm spending this time drawing a picture for you but apparently, that's necessary.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a gun. Boom. They're gone.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a baseball bat, brick or other weapon. Altercation ensues. Parents are injured, perhaps even seriously. But there is far more of an opportunity to fight back or turn the weapon on the perp. Baseball bats and bricks are not lethal weapons by definition of existence. Guns are.

Parents walk in, mentally unstable, angry kid goes berserk and beats them/stabs them to death.

I know you're earning your NRA points by arguing this, but, statistically, you are wrong. We are talking about ODDS of what would happen. The fact that a gun was in the equation makes the situation infinitely more dangerous.

[Anonymous]

Maybe it was the girl’s parents’ gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it was the girl’s parents’ gun.

Maybe so. But that only proves the point that having guns in the house makes a situation less safe, not more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A school with only 27 teens and 1:3 ratio?

Appears the diagnosis must have been pretty severe, we understand boy was mentally ill, but I wonder what was the daughter's condition to warrant this school?

If both had severe needs, I agree parents should have focussed more on mental stability rather than focus on the Nazi obsession.

+1

The buzzfeed article says that one Buckley’s concerns was how the excessive amount of time her daughter spent on the phone with her boyfriend made her forget her meds, etc.

Quoted PP here. Right, even if this boy was a liberal who loved Jews, he was still bad news. So the Nazi aspect was a red herring.

I also feel the matter should have been discussed privately between school and both sets of parents without involving unrelated friends like the 18 year old in the article or emailing the contents around. Regular discipline methods like curfew, social shaming and grounding probably did not work here.

Both sets of parents likely underestimated the criticality of the situation. It is a no win situation overall.

I would be very interested in knowing how he got the gun, since given that anything could have set off this boy, not having the gun seems to be the only way to have avoided this tragedy.

He didn't need a gun to get into that house. If it hadn't have been a gun it could have been a baseball bat, a knife, a brick or God only knows what else.

But chances are high that, had the weapon been a baseball bat, knife, a brick or God only knows what else, the parents would still be alive today.

The problem is ACCESS TO GUNS and the sheer number of guns that are floating around in seemingly "normal" homes and communities now.

And for that, the NRA and gun manufacturers have blood on their hands.

I dunno. The Manson family didn't need guns to carry out their horrors.

Oh please. The Manson family were professional killers, not some 17 year old idiot yahoo, going up against two adults.

Those parents expected to confront a mouthy kid. They did not expect a weapon. So I don't know that you can assume that another type of weapon wouldn't have yielded the same result. The boy was not mentally well.

I cannot believe I'm spending this time drawing a picture for you but apparently, that's necessary.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a gun. Boom. They're gone.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a baseball bat, brick or other weapon. Altercation ensues. Parents are injured, perhaps even seriously. But there is far more of an opportunity to fight back or turn the weapon on the perp. Baseball bats and bricks are not lethal weapons by definition of existence. Guns are.

Parents walk in, mentally unstable, angry kid goes berserk and beats them/stabs them to death.

I know you're earning your NRA points by arguing this, but, statistically, you are wrong. We are talking about ODDS of what would happen. The fact that a gun was in the equation makes the situation infinitely more dangerous.

He could have covered the main floor of the house with lighter fluid and torched the house killing everyone inside of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it was the girl’s parents’ gun.

Maybe so. But that only proves the point that having guns in the house makes a situation less safe, not more.

Maybe the kid used the money he earned from his PT job to illegally buy a stolen gun from a criminal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it was the girl’s parents’ gun.

Maybe so. But that only proves the point that having guns in the house makes a situation less safe, not more.

With the lack of information being released, I think it is more likely the girl’s parents gun. This seems like an open and shut case, yet little details have been released which is unusual except when one of the victims is somehow involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A school with only 27 teens and 1:3 ratio?

Appears the diagnosis must have been pretty severe, we understand boy was mentally ill, but I wonder what was the daughter's condition to warrant this school?

If both had severe needs, I agree parents should have focussed more on mental stability rather than focus on the Nazi obsession.

+1

The buzzfeed article says that one Buckley’s concerns was how the excessive amount of time her daughter spent on the phone with her boyfriend made her forget her meds, etc.

Quoted PP here. Right, even if this boy was a liberal who loved Jews, he was still bad news. So the Nazi aspect was a red herring.

I also feel the matter should have been discussed privately between school and both sets of parents without involving unrelated friends like the 18 year old in the article or emailing the contents around. Regular discipline methods like curfew, social shaming and grounding probably did not work here.

Both sets of parents likely underestimated the criticality of the situation. It is a no win situation overall.

I would be very interested in knowing how he got the gun, since given that anything could have set off this boy, not having the gun seems to be the only way to have avoided this tragedy.

He didn't need a gun to get into that house. If it hadn't have been a gun it could have been a baseball bat, a knife, a brick or God only knows what else.

But chances are high that, had the weapon been a baseball bat, knife, a brick or God only knows what else, the parents would still be alive today.

The problem is ACCESS TO GUNS and the sheer number of guns that are floating around in seemingly "normal" homes and communities now.

And for that, the NRA and gun manufacturers have blood on their hands.

I dunno. The Manson family didn't need guns to carry out their horrors.

Oh please. The Manson family were professional killers, not some 17 year old idiot yahoo, going up against two adults.

Those parents expected to confront a mouthy kid. They did not expect a weapon. So I don't know that you can assume that another type of weapon wouldn't have yielded the same result. The boy was not mentally well.

I cannot believe I'm spending this time drawing a picture for you but apparently, that's necessary.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a gun. Boom. They're gone.

Parents walk into bedroom. Kid is there, with daughter, holding a baseball bat, brick or other weapon. Altercation ensues. Parents are injured, perhaps even seriously. But there is far more of an opportunity to fight back or turn the weapon on the perp. Baseball bats and bricks are not lethal weapons by definition of existence. Guns are.

Parents walk in, mentally unstable, angry kid goes berserk and beats them/stabs them to death.

I know you're earning your NRA points by arguing this, but, statistically, you are wrong. We are talking about ODDS of what would happen. The fact that a gun was in the equation makes the situation infinitely more dangerous.

He could have covered the main floor of the house with lighter fluid and torched the house killing everyone inside of it.

Frankly, I doubt he was that smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it was the girl’s parents’ gun.

Maybe so. But that only proves the point that having guns in the house makes a situation less safe, not more.

With the lack of information being released, I think it is more likely the girl’s parents gun. This seems like an open and shut case, yet little details have been released which is unusual except when one of the victims is somehow involved.

Probably the shooter's parents' gun. They are Trump supporters with a NeoNazi kid. My money is on them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it was the girl’s parents’ gun.

Maybe so. But that only proves the point that having guns in the house makes a situation less safe, not more.

With the lack of information being released, I think it is more likely the girl’s parents gun. This seems like an open and shut case, yet little details have been released which is unusual except when one of the victims is somehow involved.

Probably the shooter's parents' gun. They are Trump supporters with a NeoNazi kid. My money is on them.

+ 1. And I hope that the survivors in the Kuhn-Fricker family sue them, and take away everything they have for allowing that kid access to a gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it was the girl’s parents’ gun.

Maybe so. But that only proves the point that having guns in the house makes a situation less safe, not more.

With the lack of information being released, I think it is more likely the girl’s parents gun. This seems like an open and shut case, yet little details have been released which is unusual except when one of the victims is somehow involved.

Thebgrandmother already said to the press the boy brought the gun with him and it was not the Fricker’s gun. So stop.

[Anonymous]

The police are probably waiting until they have a strong case to charge the shooter's parents. His parent's were negligent and he should not have had access to an uber/lyft account, a car, and should not have unsupervised time.

This was a two-parent home with financial capital. They were well-aware of his state of mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The police are probably waiting until they have a strong case to charge the shooter's parents. His parent's were negligent and he should not have had access to an uber/lyft account, a car, and should not have unsupervised time.

This was a two-parent home with financial capital. They were well-aware of his state of mind.

So mentally ill people should not have access to Uber? They will argue that he was supervised; they thought he was in the house. They are not required to have a 24 hour guard posted, watching him.

I agree that his parents should be charged, but the only thing, legally, I think they can get them on is that he had access to their guns.