2 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Guns are essential for many reasons. Hunting is a major one, to keep the animal populations, certain ones, in the carrying capacity of the land they live on. This is even more important now than before because man has raped the earth and decimated much of their land.

Secondly, countries fight each other and it's the way to protect the innocents.

Thirdly, target shooting is a fun pastime for thousands, and a sport for some.

Yes, they can kill people, but it's not the guns doing the killing but the people. Innocents are killed by those who are mentally ill, and most of this starts at home, so it's on the parents lack of teaching, abuse, neglect or people getting bullied like this one.

Suicides lead the way, and if there were no guns, they would choose another method. Getting a handle on depression is the problem there.

Gangs and domestic violence are most of the remainder of shootings.

It only takes one gun to kill many, and it's not the gun collectors who are killing innocent people but a disturbed individual that got their hands on a gun.

Classic strawman. You’re arguing against something I didn’t say.
'Generally non-essential' does not mean 'no uses.'

The question is whether all of those uses justify the level of gun availability and the number of deaths that come with it.

There will never be a universal panacea for mental illness or violent crime in our lifetime.

'It’s not the guns doing the killing but the people.' I agree.

In the U.S., it's the people putting self-interest and an absolutist view of the 2nd Amendment ahead of reducing deaths who are the problem.

No, people do not simply 'choose another method.' The evidence shows otherwise. Studies consistently find that access to firearms is associated with a three- to five-fold higher risk of completed suicide. Guns are uniquely lethal, and other methods do not fully substitute because many suicidal crises are temporary and impulsive.

More guns mean more opportunities for deaths from suicide, accidents, and violence.

1 hour ago, brewsterbudgen said:

It's been reported in the news. I have no idea if he used the gun to murder his Grandparents, but, yes, it would be my assumption.

Shot them both in the head before school and then went to school to continue the shooting.

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

Shot them both in the head before school and then went to school to continue the shooting.

Lad on a mission!

1 minute ago, Mr Awesome said:

It's not an absolutist view; it's binary. You are either pro Bill of Rights or against the Bill of Rights. Which one is it?

What's this got to do with a 14 yr in Greater Bangkok losing it completely and killing at least 7 people and himself.

How does a 14 yo kid get their hands on a deadly weapon, with plenty of ammunition?

Just now, dinsdale said:

What's this got to do with a 14 yr in Greater Bangkok losing it completely and killing at least 7 people and himself.

I responded to a comment in this thread. You can ask the original poster for more information.

Just now, Lacessit said:

How does a 14 yo kid get their hands on a deadly weapon, with plenty of ammunition?

By illegal means.

5 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

How does a 14 yo kid get their hands on a deadly weapon, with plenty of ammunition?

It was his grandfather's and registered.

3 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Thailand's had them since 1940 at the least. It's not a spreading disease but the same thing every time. Unchecked or ignored mental illness, bullying, abuse and neglect of the shooters.

I am sure we have mental illness, bullying, abuse and neglect of students in Australia.

Perhaps you could explain why we don't have school shootings.

5 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I am sure we have mental illness, bullying, abuse and neglect of students in Australia.

Perhaps you could explain why we don't have school shootings.

You are wrong once again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_Australia

There was literally a red flag about this kid. Well, a red flag with a Hakenkreuz.

https://www.amarintv.com/news/crime/554130

9 hours ago, save the frogs said:

Of course there is.

Schools need to understand why it happened to try to prevent it happening again.

I think we can clearly say he was a f*****g nutcase. Anything more needed???? Prevent it happening again!!! get real the world is full of crazy people you can never stop events like this happening again it’s impossible how many restrictions you implement nutcases always find ways.

23 minutes ago, greeneking said:

Registered to his grandfather. It should not have been available to him, nor the ammunition.

You are correct but it happens. They lived in the same house.

12 hours ago, marin said:

What is the point of this speculation. Nobody knows anything now other than 7 are tragically dead, and many wounded including at least one critically. No reason at all for speculation at a time like this.

It's natural for people to want to ask why, pointless as it may be. Very likely a maladjusted person in crisis and some event may have triggered him, but no one will ever know because he's dead.

I haven't been able to read through the whole thread, but has anyone, friend or relative, come forward who was in touch with the perp? Any insight into what made him snap?

Malaysians like me are very fortunate that Malaysia has a very strict gun law. In the past, some firearms offences could attract a mandatory death sentence but nowadays judges are allowed to either pass the death sentence or a 30 to 40 year jail term instead of imposing a mandatory death sentence.

33 minutes ago, Selatan said:

Malaysians like me are very fortunate that Malaysia has a very strict gun law. In the past, some firearms offences could attract a mandatory death sentence but nowadays judges are allowed to either pass the death sentence or a 30 to 40 year jail term instead of imposing a mandatory death sentence.

A Thai policeman told me once that Thailand couldn't have the death sentence for possession of firearms as it could lead to planting of evidence, then a demand for a large sum to remove the 'evidence'.

There is no "right" to bear arms in Thailand, especially for kids of 14. Grandads and other adults over 20 with registered guns should lock them in a gun safe.

Yes, in the deep South, there is a reason why self defence is required but really other than that area, there is no reason.

Guns for target practice maybe. I don't remember if a Thai has ever won an Olympic medal for shooting.

While a gun permit can technically list hunting as the intended purpose, Thailand's Wildlife Conservation and Protection Act and National Parks Act ban hunting, shooting, or trapping animals in national parks, forest reserves, and protected areas.

No harm in controlling guns further.

10 hours ago, vangrop said:

According to my girlfriend, the shooter was 14 years old and acted out of revenge because he was being bullied at school by other students. His parents are divorced, and he lived with his grandparents. He allegedly murdered them first before going off to commit the attack.

I'd buy that. Thai people can be extremely repressed so imagine getting bullied in school and humiliated in front of everyone and this happening over and over again. I can totally see a Thai teenager snapping and taking revenge. Not even Thai people though this could happen in any country given the right set of circumstances and individual.

11 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Classic strawman. You’re arguing against something I didn’t say.
'Generally non-essential' does not mean 'no uses.'

The question is whether all of those uses justify the level of gun availability and the number of deaths that come with it.

There will never be a universal panacea for mental illness or violent crime in our lifetime.

'It’s not the guns doing the killing but the people.' I agree.

In the U.S., it's the people putting self-interest and an absolutist view of the 2nd Amendment ahead of reducing deaths who are the problem.

No, people do not simply 'choose another method.' The evidence shows otherwise. Studies consistently find that access to firearms is associated with a three- to five-fold higher risk of completed suicide. Guns are uniquely lethal, and other methods do not fully substitute because many suicidal crises are temporary and impulsive.

More guns mean more opportunities for deaths from suicide, accidents, and violence.

Still haven't shown any ways to alter the reality. This isn't about the US, and every legitimate gun owner knows what's going on and what needs to be done. It's nothing to do with the amount of guns, as it only takes one to kill, commit suicide or hunting and target shooting. Multiple gun owners haven't been the criminals doing the shootings. I have 6 and use them for hunting, and my children knew all along what they were used for and all ended up as decent adults because they were taught respect for life at home. This boy wasn't. Along with the fact he was bullied at school and a good possibility the teachers did nothing to stop it, if they were told by him.

How do you keep guns out of legitimate buyers hands that end up taking their lives? Yes, it makes it easier but doesn't address the problem at hand, which is still a mental illness. If they only waited for tomorrow is a line I often use, although it will still appear once again if the illness isn't helped in one way or another, and it doesn't take that gun to do it then.

The problem is always the same. Keeping guns away from illegal owners, adjusting the laws a little to prevent some of this, and making sure any guns owned are locked away so people like this boy can't get their hands on them. In this case it would have saved lives right now, although finding an illegal gun isn't that hard in Thailand.

Sometimes people think and don't follow through on their plans, but this boy was going to do something because it was eating at him for quite awhile, seeing his internet history and the fact he was bullied and possibly not only at school but at home.

Edited Saturday at 12:29 AM2 days by fredwiggy

3 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Still haven't shown any ways to alter the reality. This isn't about the US, and every legitimate gun owner knows what's going on and what needs to be done. It's nothing to do with the amount of guns, as it only takes one to kill, commit suicide or hunting and target shooting. Multiple gun owners haven't been the criminals doing the shootings. I have 6 and use them for hunting, and my children knew all along what they were used for and all ended up as decent adults because they were taught respect for life at home. This boy wasn't.

How do you keep guns out of legitimate buyers hands that end up taking their lives? Yes, it makes it easier but doesn't address the problem at hand, which is still a mental illness. If they only waited for tomorrow is a line I often use, although it will still appear once again if the illness isn't helped in one way or another, and it doesn't take that gun to do it then.

The problem is always the same. Keeping guns away from illegal owners, adjusting the laws a little to prevent some of this, and making sure any guns owned are locked away so people like this boy can't get their hands on them. In this case it would have saved lives right now, although finding an illegal gun isn't that hard in Thailand.

Sometimes people think and don't follow through on their plans, but this boy was going to do something because it was eating at him for quite awhile, seeing his internet history and the fact he was bullied and possibly not only at school but at home.

High gun ownership means more deaths. Just common sense.

6 minutes ago, Rockyroad said:

High gun ownership means more deaths. Just common sense.

No, it's nothing to do with the amount of guns owned but who has them. There are thousands of multiple gun owners that aren't killing anyone. The ones that are are getting their hands on them, like this one, where the gun wasn't locked away. He had a mission. To get back at those who bullied him, and that could have also been his grandparents. The legal gun his grandpa owned was available, and if it wasn't, this wouldn't have happened, unless he "found" another gun, which isn't hard to do, especially in a country where illegal guns are floating around.

Mental illness not addressed will appear in one of two ways. Self destruction or against others, as this one did with both.

More guns available to the public does mean more gun crimes of course, as they'll eventually fall into the wrong hands, which is why laws need to be adjusted.

Edited Saturday at 12:35 AM2 days by fredwiggy

The kid killed his grandparents for gods sake. There has to be more to the story.

4 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Still haven't shown any ways to alter the reality. This ........., and every legitimate gun owner knows what's going on and what needs to be done. It's nothing to do with the amount of guns, as it only takes one to kill, commit suicide or hunting and target shooting. Multiple gun owners haven't been the criminals doing the shootings. I have 6 and use them for hunting, and my children knew all along what they were used for and all ended up as decent adults because they were taught respect for life at home. This boy wasn't. Along with the fact he was bullied at school and a good possibility the teachers did nothing to stop it, if they were told by him.

How do you keep guns out of legitimate buyers hands that end up taking their lives? Yes, it makes it easier but doesn't address the problem at hand, which is still a mental illness. If they only waited for tomorrow is a line I often use, although it will still appear once again if the illness isn't helped in one way or another, and it doesn't take that gun to do it then.

The problem is always the same. Keeping guns away from illegal owners, adjusting the laws a little to prevent some of this, and making sure any guns owned are locked away so people like this boy can't get their hands on them. In this case it would have saved lives right now, although finding an illegal gun isn't that hard in Thailand.

Sometimes people think and don't follow through on their plans, but this boy was going to do something because it was eating at him for quite awhile, seeing his internet history and the fact he was bullied and possibly not only at school but at home.

Seriously, your argument lacks logic and reasoning. Let's break down why:

Non sequitur: 'It only takes one gun to kill, therefore the number of guns doesn't matter.' That conclusion simply doesn't follow.

Straw man: You're arguing against claims I never made. I never said guns are the only cause, that mental illness is irrelevant, or that responsible gun owners are the problem.

Anecdotal evidence: Your six guns and your experience raising your children don't refute population-level evidence.

False dichotomy: You treat mental illness and firearm availability as mutually exclusive explanations. Both can contribute to the outcome.

Red herring: Your personal gun ownership and hunting anecdote don't address whether, at the population level, firearm availability affects mortality.

Argument from possibility: Saying someone could use another method doesn't mean they would, or that the alternative would be equally lethal.

So far, you haven't provided a logical argument against the proposition that greater firearm availability creates more opportunities for firearm-related deaths.

Facts establish what is true. Logic establishes whether the conclusion is valid and actually follows from those facts.

Edited Saturday at 05:26 AM2 days by LosLobo

16 hours ago, Lacessit said:

How does a 14 yo kid get their hands on a deadly weapon, with plenty of ammunition?

I think it was his father's gun, and neither gun nor ammo securely locked away.

When I own guns in the UK, I had to keep the guns in one secure gun cabinet that was screwed to a solid wall, the ammo in another similar cabinet, and the keys to both with me all the time, 24/7.

Edited Saturday at 05:29 AM2 days by simon43

32 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Seriously, your argument lacks logic and reasoning. Let's break down why:

Non sequitur: 'It only takes one gun to kill, therefore the number of guns doesn't matter.' That conclusion simply doesn't follow.

Straw man: You're arguing against claims I never made. I never said guns are the only cause, that mental illness is irrelevant, or that responsible gun owners are the problem.

Anecdotal evidence: Your six guns and your experience raising your children don't refute population-level evidence.

False dichotomy: You treat mental illness and firearm availability as mutually exclusive explanations. Both can contribute to the outcome.

Red herring: Your personal gun ownership and hunting anecdote don't address whether, at the population level, firearm availability affects mortality.

Argument from possibility: Saying someone could use another method doesn't mean they would, or that the alternative would be equally lethal.

So far, you haven't provided a logical argument against the proposition that greater firearm availability creates more opportunities for firearm-related deaths.

Facts establish what is true. Logic establishes whether the conclusion is valid and actually follows from those facts.

My argument is spot on. No matter how many guns are around, only certain people use them against innocents, and those are the mentally ill. Look back at your first comment to me, and you'll know why I said what I did, or not.

What is population level evidence got to do with what I've been saying all along? maybe you're missing all of what I've written, so look again, at this and other gun topics I've replied in, to see my views.

I never said anything about the guns not being a problem, but only that if they're in the wrong hands. Simple to understand. Take all legitimate guns away from legitimate owners, and you'll see less deaths of course, but they'll still be in the hands of criminals. Guns can be made outside a factory.

No guns on earth, no gun deaths. No kidding, but again, the people who are legitimate gun owners aren't the ones doing the shootings. Now, instead of using AI for things you don't understand, look at why people have guns, and what the majority uses them for.

Yes, suicides by gun would be reduced if a person who's suicidal didn't have access to them, but depression isn't a reason to stop a gun sale. Yes, if a suicidal person didn't have a gun, it wouldn't be as easy to kill themselves. They might go to the next day with a better outlook, or they might not, depending on the main problem with depression. Untreated it could eventually lead to a suicide, so it's still up to them to receive help, or they might look to another method when they get low again, which they eventually will, if it's clinical depression and not just a temporary seasonal or environmental kind.

You thinking that all guns should be banned isn't going to work, as there are millions of legitimate gun owners that aren't going to give them up, especially in America, so shy waste time trying to convince anyone of this as it's never going to happen? That the laws need to be adjusted is already known by all Americans, especially gun owners like myself.

When you have any ideas how to stop guns from getting into the hands of people who will kill others, let us know, as I've already established that in earlier topics on gun control, and others are also thinking of enacting them. I sold guns for years, and know full well the loopholes that need repairing.

42 minutes ago, simon43 said:

I think it was his father's gun, and neither gun nor ammo securely locked away.

When I own guns in the UK, I had to keep the guns in one secure gun cabinet that was screwed to a solid wall, the ammo in another similar cabinet, and the keys to both with me all the time, 24/7.

Where were the keys when you had a shower, went swimming, or in the gym/sauna?

23 hours ago, emptypockets said:

A lot of farmers have guns in Issaan. They aren't at all rich.

just because they have something
does not mean they acquired it legally
you may also be surprised how much some farmers actually do have
A tractor alone can cost a few million baht
more than enough to qualify them for a license

22 hours ago, cynic1 said:

This is what I got when I Googled;

"Penalties

• Illegal Possession: Unlicensed possession or smuggling of firearms carries heavy criminal penalties, ranging from 1 to 20 years in prison depending on the severity and weapon type. Foreigners caught with firearms face immediate arrest and swift legal prosecution."

There was more but Thailand is reasonably good in my opinion when in comes to legal security. But when it comes to corruption and greed, laws would be meaningless, especially if there is a dollar to be made!

Please explain what point you are trying to make?
Thai's can LEGALLY own guns in Thailand

44 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

My argument is spot on. No matter how many guns are around, only certain people use them against innocents, and those are the mentally ill. Look back at your first comment to me, and you'll know why I said what I did, or not.

What is population level evidence got to do with what I've been saying all along? maybe you're missing all of what I've written, so look again, at this and other gun topics I've replied in, to see my views.

I never said anything about the guns not being a problem, but only that if they're in the wrong hands. Simple to understand. Take all legitimate guns away from legitimate owners, and you'll see less deaths of course, but they'll still be in the hands of criminals. Guns can be made outside a factory.

No guns on earth, no gun deaths. No kidding, but again, the people who are legitimate gun owners aren't the ones doing the shootings. Now, instead of using AI for things you don't understand, look at why people have guns, and what the majority uses them for.

Yes, suicides by gun would be reduced if a person who's suicidal didn't have access to them, but depression isn't a reason to stop a gun sale. Yes, if a suicidal person didn't have a gun, it wouldn't be as easy to kill themselves. They might go to the next day with a better outlook, or they might not, depending on the main problem with depression. Untreated it could eventually lead to a suicide, so it's still up to them to receive help, or they might look to another method when they get low again, which they eventually will, if it's clinical depression and not just a temporary seasonal or environmental kind.

You thinking that all guns should be banned isn't going to work, as there are millions of legitimate gun owners that aren't going to give them up, especially in America, so shy waste time trying to convince anyone of this as it's never going to happen? That the laws need to be adjusted is already known by all Americans, especially gun owners like myself.

When you have any ideas how to stop guns from getting into the hands of people who will kill others, let us know, as I've already established that in earlier topics on gun control, and others are also thinking of enacting them. I sold guns for years, and know full well the loopholes that need repairing.

Your post is full of attributions I never made.

This is becoming a Brandolini's-law situation: a post of loosely connected claims requires far more effort to untangle than it took to make. My central proposition still hasn't been refuted.

When you can present a logical argument that actually addresses the proposition, let me know.